Norfolk Poverty Report

Norfolk Plan

to

Reduce Poverty The Mayor’s Commission on Poverty Reduction

PREPARED BY Communitas Consulting

June 2014

M AYOR’ S CO M M I S S I O N O N P OVERTY REDUCT I O N Mayor: Paul D. Fraim Co-Chairs: Vice Mayor Angelia Williams and Councilmember Andy Protogyrou Judy Begland, Opportunity Inc. of Hampton Roads Workforce Development Workgroup

Sharon D. Houston, Garden of Hope Workforce Development Workgroup

Lynne Berg, Prime Plus Workforce Development Workgroup

Adale M. Martin, Doctoral Candidate at ODU Youth Education and Career Pathways Workgroup

F. Nash Bilisoly, Vandeventer Black, LLP and Norfolk Redevelopment and Housing Authority, Chair Neighborhood Revitalization and Support Workgroup

Bishop B. Courtney McBath, Calvary Revival Church Workforce Development Workgroup

Joe Dillard, NAACP, Norfolk Chapter Neighborhood Revitalization and Support Workgroup

Thaler McCormick, ForKids, Inc. Neighborhood Revitalization and Support Workgroup Youth Education and Career Pathways Workgroup

Sarah Bishop, United Way of South Hampton Roads Youth Education and Career Pathways Workgroup Gary A. Bryant, Willcox Savage Youth Education and Career Pathways Workgroup Sandra Brandt, STEP UP, Inc. Workforce Development Workgroup Hosey Burgess, Virginia Employment Commission Workforce Development Workgroup, Chair Dr. Clarence Coleman, Norfolk State University Early Childhood Development Workgroup Dr. Deborah M. DiCroce/Dr. Linda Rice, Hampton Roads Community Foundation Youth Education and Career Pathways Workgroup

Charles V. McPhillips, Kaufman & Canoles, P.C. Neighborhood Revitalization and Support Workgroup Suzanne Puryear, The Planning Council Early Childhood Development Workgroup, Chair Jerry Bruce Robertson/KIM BROWN, Norfolk’s Economic Development Authority Neighborhood Revitalization and Support Workgroup Sharon Riley, Faith Deliverance Christian Center, Inc. Workforce Development Workgroup Dr. L’Tanya Simmons, Norfolk Public Schools Youth Education and Career Pathways Workgroup Early Childhood Development Workgroup

Anthony J. DiFilippo, Visit Norfolk Youth Education and Career Pathways Workgroup

Sarah Sterzing, Norfolk Ready by 5 and CHIP of South Hampton Roads Early Childhood Development Workgroup

David F. Harnage, Old Dominion University Early Childhood Development Workgroup

James M. Wofford, Retail Alliance Workforce Development Workgroup

William E. Harrell, Hampton Roads Transit Neighborhood Revitalization and Support Workgroup

Chief MICHAEL Goldsmith, Chief of Police Neighborhood Revitalization and Support, Chair

Kurt Hofelich, Sentara Norfolk General Hospital/ Sentara Rehab Network Youth Education and Career Pathways Workgroup, Chair

Captain Joseph Baron, Sheriff ’s Designee Workforce Development Workgroup

Dr. Richard V. Homan, Eastern Virginia Medical School Youth Education and Career Pathways Workgroup Workforce Development Workgroup Reverend Dr. Kirk T. Houston, Gethsemane Community Church and Norfolk School Board, Chair Neighborhood Revitalization and Support Workgroup

James Rogers, City Manager’s Designee Workforce Development Workgroup

TA B LE OF C o n t e n t s

Executive Summary................................................................................................. 1 Introduction............................................................................................................. 6 I. The Data..................................................................................................................... 8 Assets and Resources in Norfolk......................................................................... 8 Poverty in Norfolk........................................................................................................ 8 II. Recommendations............................................................................................... 16 Early Childhood Development............................................................................. 18

Early Childhood Development Strategies and Action Steps..... 18

Findings............................................................................................................................. 19

Youth Education and Career Pathways.......................................................... 24

Youth and Career Pathways Strategies and Action Steps............. 24

Findings............................................................................................................................. 25

Adult Workforce Development............................................................................ 30

Adult Workforce Development Strategies and Action Steps.... 32

Findings............................................................................................................................. 32

Neighborhood Revitalization............................................................................... 36

Neighborhood Revitalization Strategies and Action Steps....... 37

Findings............................................................................................................................. 38

III. The Approach....................................................................................................... 43 Future Work........................................................................................................................ 43 Cross Cutting Strategies........................................................................................... 43 Recommended Organizational Structure.................................................... 43

Findings............................................................................................................................. 44

Next Steps.............................................................................................................................. 47 IV. Acknowledgements.......................................................................................... 48 V. Appendices............................................................................................................... A-1

Ta b l e s a n d Fig u r e s

Figure 1. Poverty Trends in Norfolk and Virginia, 2005–2012....................... 9 Figure 2. Poverty in Norfolk, by Race, 2008–2012................................................ 10 Figure 3. Poverty by Age in Virginia and Norfolk, 2008–2012....................... 12 Figure 4. Poverty by Household Structure in Norfolk, 2008–2012........... 12 Figure 5. Percentage of Virginia and Norfolk Families Living in Poverty, 2008–2012............................................................................................... 13 Figure 6. Family Poverty by Household Type and Employment Status in Norfolk, 2008–2012............................................................................... 13 Figure 7. Unemployment in Virginia and Norfolk, 2004–2013...................... 14 Figure 8. Map of Individual Poverty Rate by Census Tract, 2008–2012..... 15 Figure 9. Early Childhood ROI versus Later Interventions...................... 19 Figure 10. Returns to Investment in Early Childhood Education........ 20 Figure 11. Location of Early Childhood Centers in Norfolk................... 21 Figure 12. Sample Low-income Household Budget.......................................... 21 Figure 13. Results of PB Young 2013 Summer Enrichment Program, by Grade................................................................................................ 26 Figure 14. NPS High School Students not Meeting Minimum Requirements for 12th Grade, 2013–2014...................................................... 27 Figure 15. Virginia Job Openings by Skill Level, 2008 and 2018...................... 28 Figure 16. Locality of Employment for Norfolk Residents....................... 34

Table 1. Individual Poverty Rate of Norfolk and Neighboring Localities, 2008–2012................................................................................................. 9 Table 2. Norfolk Poverty Rate by Race, 2008–2012............................................. 10 Table 3. Poverty by Age Group Norfolk, 2008–2012............................................ 11 Table 4. Norfolk Unemployment Rate by Race, 2008–2012............................... 14 Table 5. Poverty Rates by Educational Attainment, 2008–2012................... 14

E x e c u t i v e S u mm a r y

I n J u ly o f 2 0 1 3, 3 4 citizens embarked on a one-year process to provide the Mayor and City Council members with recommendations to improve the lives of Norfolk residents living in poverty. The Mayor’s Commission on Poverty Reduction, chaired by Vice Mayor Angelia Williams and Councilman Andy Protogyrou, was charged with examining the causes and impact of poverty in Norfolk and developing a plan to reduce poverty for future generations. This report summarizes the findings and recommendations of the Commission.

Norfolk has taken a bold and aspirational step in setting a goal to reduce poverty. Citizens, leaders, and public and private organizations have struggled to increase the financial stability of individuals and families at the neighborhood, state, and national levels for decades. The nation’s widening income gap has made the task more urgent for localities, even while many of the economic factors driving wage growth are beyond communities’ perimeter of control. In establishing the Commission on Poverty Reduction, Norfolk City leadership acknowledged these challenges. At the same time, they believed in local solutions.

In his January 2014 State of the City presentation, Mayor Paul D. Fraim described the Norfolk that many residents experience—a city with tremendous economic growth and new opportunities. There are emerging industries, a resurgence in the housing market, innovation in the public and private sectors, and a strong employment base in the military, health care, and local government sectors. However, the Mayor underscored the fact that too few residents share in this growth. He described the fact that 16.5 percent of Norfolk’s families live in poverty as unacceptable—a rate that must decrease to ensure the city’s future vitality.1 The City leadership invited members of the community to share in the ownership, creativity, and responsibility for creating a more hopeful future for fellow Norfolk citizens. This plan outlines a recommended path forward—grounded in the community’s many physical, organizational, and civic assets, reflecting the input of residents, and informed by national and local research on what works.

The Commission’s vision is that: “Individuals in the City of Norfolk have the opportunity to develop their skills and earn a wage that allows them to thrive, to sustain their families, and to have access to quality housing, education, food, transportation, child care, and healthcare.”

Commissioners’ core values are to build a thriving future for all Norfolk residents by creating opportunities for pathways out of poverty, providing the tools and education needed to enter and succeed in those pathways, relying on citizens’ motivation and a sense of personal responsibility, and investing in cost-effective and proven solutions.

June 2014 • 1

The report focuses on four critical areas to reduce poverty: (1) supporting early childhood development and parents, (2) improving the education and the career pathways of young people, (3) strengthening opportunities for adults to thrive in the workforce, and (4) revitalizing the city’s neighborhoods to create more engagement, economic opportunities, and inclusive communities.

T h e R e c o m m e n d ati o n s After nine months, Commissioners have heard from over 200 residents on what will help future generations thrive, collected and presented data to their peers, organized themselves in work groups, and crafted precise policy recommendations.

They have been aided by a talented group of City staff. Each step of the way, the Mayor and City Council members have championed these efforts, adopting Commissioner recommendations even before the report is complete, such as increasing the living wage for City employees, revising zoning regulations to align with state standards for in-home child care providers, and considering expanding access to publicly funded pre-school for low-income families in FY15.

The following goals and strategies are intended to reduce poverty in Norfolk. In a full report, detailed action steps, projected results, and community partners are identified. The plan is based on the premise that it will take the work of many active citizens, an investment of public and private resources, and multiple skilled and effective organizations to bring about the envisioned results.

2 • N o rfolk Pl an to Reduce Povert y

Early Childhood Development Goal: Prepare young children for academic success and healthy development through effective early childhood programs.

A strong start for many of Norfolk’s children, with support from both their parents and their community, will help interrupt the cycle of generational poverty and position children to be more likely to thrive in school. Commissioners recommend an infusion of quality child care into the systems that care for Norfolk children, increasing the number of child care homes with Virginia’s Star Quality Initiative (VSQI) designation, greater availability of and access to evidence-based parent education and early childhood resources through community outreach and education, and the opportunity for all parents of newborns to be screened for and receive voluntary support services.

Strategies: ❑❑ Increase the number of high quality child care homes and centers, as well as access to them. ❑❑ Increase the level of quality of all systems that care for and educate children from birth to five years old. ❑❑ Connect families in need with early intervention and support services. ❑❑ Develop a focused outreach effort in the community and educational settings.

Youth Education and Career Pathways Goal: Prepare youth and young adults to secure family-sustaining employment through effective programs that address both in-school and out-of-school factors.

One of the most important credentials for finding a job and earning a family-supporting wage is completing high school and some form of post-secondary education. Commissioners sought to create a path between school, a young person’s skills and aspirations, and the regional labor market. They identified internships, apprenticeships, and career exposure opportunities as ways for employers to work with schools.

While Commissioners did not make recommendations for reforming Norfolk Public Schools overall, they supported two innovative proposals to create new schools—the Open Campus High School and the Career and Technical Education High School—on the premise that these programs will assist young people at risk of dropping out to re-connect with school, improve their knowledge and skills, and gain a solid footing for future career development. These initiatives will be supported through combined public and private funding.

Strategies: ❑❑ Improve academic achievement for lowincome elementary, middle, and high school students. ❑❑ Improve the quality and exposure to career education and skills training for Norfolk’s youth.

Adult Workforce Development Goal: Help adults prepare for the workplace by expanding access to career development programs and employment support.

A full-time job that supports a family is a fundamental tool in fighting poverty, and finding one requires both formal education and knowledge of the employment market. Yet for many Norfolk residents, the pathway to jobs is unclear, and opportunities for employment or career development are out of reach. Commissioners recommend improving the way that residents connect to regional job listings and access training resources, particularly for previously incarcerated and young adults age 18-24, who are the second largest group in poverty after children. They encourage employers to increase partnerships with female and minority-owned small businesses and recommend a study of barriers faced by citizens and residents’ use of local services that will inform a more customized and effective approach for the adult population.

Strategies: ❑❑ Increase information about and access to employment, education, training opportunities, and work-related resources. ❑❑ Provide access, support, information, and services to adult populations living in poverty. ❑❑ Promote workforce development resources as part of the City of Norfolk’s business retention efforts.

June 2014 • 3

Neighborhood Revitalization and Support Goal: With residents driving the process, create safe and thriving communities by increasing access to jobs, neighborhood amenities, and quality affordable homes.

In Norfolk, families and individuals living in poverty are often concentrated in distressed neighborhoods. Commissioners want to fundamentally change the housing mix and the resources and opportunities available to residents in low-income neighborhoods and improve the vitality of the local economy. They seek to help residents accrue assets through home ownership, with support from a housing trust fund, and to promote upward mobility. To address the lack of affordable home ownership and rental units, Commissioners reviewed national models that had successfully transformed neighborhoods.

In these models, these cities had developed initiatives involving multiple sectors; strong resident engagement; innovative financing; and comprehensive solutions linking housing, education, workforce development, transportation, and health services. The Commissioners seek to replicate a similar model in Norfolk, building leadership among residents, gaining trust among citizens, and incorporating the voices of residents into neighborhood efforts and city policies and plans.

4 • N o rfolk Pl an to Reduce Povert y

Strategies: ❑❑ Stabilize stressed neighborhoods through community revitalization and economic development. ❑❑ Develop mixed-income housing and mixed-use communities in distressed neighborhoods. ❑❑ Create policies to facilitate the deconcentration of poverty in Norfolk’s public housing communities.

Cr o s s - C u tti n g Str at e g i e s : In order to implement the plan, the Commissioners identified two overall strategies that are relevant for achieving all four goals. These cross-cutting strategies will increase usage and raise awareness about existing services in the four areas of the plan, and create an organizational structure that will guide the plan’s implementation.

The intent is to engage Norfolk citizens in reducing poverty through a participatory and focused effort that will result in measurable change. ❑❑ Increase awareness and use of available resources and ways to improve the health of Norfolk children, families, and neighborhoods. ❑❑ Coordinate the implementation of the plan to reduce poverty.

This plan is intended to reduce poverty in Norfolk.

Like its inception, its future will depend on bringing people together from across sectors and neighborhoods, with a blend of public, nonprofit, private, and charitable resources to implement a shared vision of Norfolk’s future. It is not a comprehensive plan to address all aspects of poverty; it is a plan to act upon four goals that cannot be achieved by any one organization alone, and that will make a measurable difference in the quality of life for Norfolk’s citizens, particularly those living at or below 130 percent of the poverty level ($15,171 for an individual or $31,005 for a family of four).2 Reducing poverty is an essential part of building a vital and healthy Norfolk for all residents, not only those in poverty. In this plan there are roles and responsibilities for industries, schools, government, nonprofit agencies, foundations, civic groups, individuals, children, and families—for all have a stake in a better future.

The time of study is over, and the time for action has come.

“Young people need to see success at an early age.

Include them in programs that make them work and earn a small stipend… expose them to different career paths early on.”

-Town Hall Meetings

“Individuals with felonies are unable to get employment.

These individuals can work and have the right skills, but can’t get hired, so the families are losing out and falling into poverty.”

-Town Hall Meetings

“Our biggest issue is lack of communication—we have many programs to help with job training and employment skills, but the people who need them don’t know about them.”

-Town Hall Meetings

June 2014 • 5

I N TRODUCT I O N

“

If you bring the appropriate people together in constructive ways with good information, they will create authentic visions and strategies for addressing the shared concerns of the organizations and the community.”3

I n J u ly o f 2 0 1 3 , 34 citizens embarked on a one-year process to provide the Mayor and City Council members with recommendations to improve the lives of Norfolk residents living in poverty. The Mayor’s Commission on Poverty Reduction, chaired by Vice Mayor Angelia Williams and Councilman Andy Protogyrou, was charged with examining the causes and impact of poverty in Norfolk and developing a plan to reduce poverty for future generations. This report summarizes the findings and recommendations of the Commission.

Norfolk has taken a bold and aspirational step in setting a goal to reduce poverty. Citizens, leaders, and public and private organizations have struggled to increase the financial stability of individuals and families at the neighborhood, state, and national levels for decades. The nation’s widening income gap has made the task more urgent for localities, even while many of the economic factors driving wage growth are beyond communities’ perimeter of control. In establishing 6 • N o rfolk Pl an to Reduce Povert y

the Commission on Poverty Reduction, Norfolk City leadership acknowledged these challenges.

At the same time, they believed in local solutions.

The City leadership invited members of the community to share in the ownership, creativity, and responsibility for creating a more hopeful future for fellow Norfolk citizens. This plan outlines a recommended path forward—grounded in the community’s many physical, organizational, and civic assets, and informed by national and local research on what works.

Across the country, hands-on civic efforts engaging a broad spectrum of the community have been shown to get things done, often more directly than federal or statewide efforts. A recent article in the Atlantic Monthly by James Fallows demonstrated how a handful of small cities have engaged citizens in a “practical-minded, non-ideological, future-oriented” mode of selfgovernment that has turned around the economic health of cities as diverse as Greenville, South Carolina and Burlington, Vermont.4 With this plan, the City of Norfolk intends to build a more thriving future for all Norfolk residents by creating opportunities for pathways out of poverty, providing the tools and education needed to enter and succeed in those pathways, relying on citizens’ motivation and sense of personal responsibility, and investing in cost-effective and proven solutions.

After nine months, Commissioners have heard from over 200 residents on what will help future generations thrive, collected and presented data to their peers, organized themselves into work groups, and crafted precise policy recommendations. They have been aided by a talented group of City staff. Each step of the

way, the Mayor and City Council members have championed these efforts, adopting Commissioner recommendations even before the report was complete, such as increasing the living wage for City employees, revising zoning regulations to align with state standards for in-home child care providers, and considering expanding access to publicly funded pre-school for low-income families in fiscal year 2015.

The Commissioners’ intent is that residents in the city of Norfolk can develop their skills, pursue an education, and earn a wage that translates into an ability to be self-sufficient in supporting their families. This means that residents are able to make purchases to support their families’ basic needs and invest in their own personal development and that of their children. The Commission’s vision is that: “Individuals in the City of Norfolk have the opportunity to develop their skills and earn a wage that allows them to thrive, to sustain their families, and to have access to quality housing, education, food, transportation, child care, and healthcare.”

This report is both a study on what causes poverty in Norfolk and a call to action to change the future course for Norfolk residents. The report is structured in three main sections: 1. THE Data – a snapshot on poverty in Norfolk and selected community assets; 2. The Recommendations – a synopsis of the four critical areas identified to reduce poverty; and 3. The Approach – a recommended structure and steps for future action, and a

review of the method Commissioners’ used to create the report.

The report focuses on four critical areas to reduce poverty: (1) supporting early childhood development and parents, (2) improving the education and the career pathways of young people, (3) strengthening opportunities for adults to thrive in the workforce, and (4) revitalizing the city’s neighborhoods to create more engagement, economic opportunities, and inclusive communities. Rationale, findings and specific strategies are outlined in the recommendations section.

The plan is based on the premise that it will take the work of many active citizens, an investment of public and private resources, and multiple skilled and effective organizations to bring about the envisioned results.

The report was written by Communitas Consulting, drawing extensively from the presentations and work of the Commissioners and the City staff team who were active throughout.

A detailed appendix includes a work plan for short, medium, and long-term goals, including envisioned community partners to complete the work and estimated costs of immediate action steps.

“Educating the public is crucial because there is still a big disconnect—folks do not feel informed. A more efficient method for disseminating information is needed.”

-Town Hall Meetings

June 2014 • 7

THE DATA

Assets and Resources in Norfolk Norfolk is described as “the business, cultural, educational, and medical center of the Hampton Roads region” in the City’s comprehensive plan.5 Norfolk has a vibrant cultural community of museums, theaters, and musical venues and serves as a center of higher education, inclusive of community college and four year-institutions. The city hosts four hospitals and one medical school.

All of these institutions contribute to the quality of life in Norfolk and are major employers invested in the future health of the region.

The city of Norfolk has an employment base where the military, health care services, and the public sector are the largest employers (military 22 percent, health care 11 percent, and federal and civilian government 8 percent).6 Norfolk’s largest industries are health care and social assistance (16.4 percent), educational services (11.8 percent), retail trade (9.4%), public administration (9.3 percent), and professional, scientific, and technical services (8.4 percent).7

8 • N o rfolk Pl an to Reduce Povert y

At six public meetings organized to shape the Plan to Reduce Poverty, residents cited numerous successful programs and initiatives. These included educational programs at libraries, adult workforce programs at Opportunity, Inc., and effective early childhood education programs. When sharing what has worked to improve their neighborhoods, residents described the removal of blighted properties, an increased neighborhood police presence, development of new businesses and jobs, accessible parks for young people, and permanent supportive housing for persons who are homeless as some of the many positive initiatives supported through combined civic, public, and private efforts.

P o v e rt y i n N o r f o l k In his January 2014 State of the City presentation, Mayor Paul D. Fraim described the Norfolk that many residents experience—a city with tremendous economic growth and new opportunities. There are emerging industries, a resurgence in the housing market, innovation in the public and private sectors, and a strong employment base in the military, health care, and local government sectors. Median household income has increased from $31,815 in 2000 to $43,108 by most recent estimates. However, he underscored the fact that too few residents share in this growth. Mayor Fraim stated that 16.5 percent of Norfolk’s families live in poverty—an unacceptably high level that he stated must decrease to ensure the city’s future vitality.9 Norfolk’s poverty level has historically been nearly double Virginia’s overall average. The U.S. Census Bureau reported that from 2008–2012, 18.2 percent of individuals (27.7 percent of

Figure 1. Poverty Trends in Norfolk and Virginia, 2005–2012 8

Homeownership is a significant way to break the cycle of

25%

intergenerational poverty.”

20%

-Town Hall Meetings

15% 10%

“I want to make sure

5%

that ‘affordable’ housing

0%

includes being affordable at my income level.”

-Town Hall Meetings

children) in Norfolk experienced poverty, versus 11.1 percent of individuals (14.6 percent of children) across the state as a whole.10 Compared to neighboring Hampton Roads localities, Norfolk has a high poverty rate (Table 1).11 While poverty is a significant problem across the region, it is especially concentrated in the city of Norfolk.

Norfolk’s poverty levels have risen in the last decade, pushed upward by the recent economic recession. And although the city has a variety of resources in place to assist residents in securing adequate employment, accessing education, and increasing their incomes, current efforts have not substantially decreased the number of Norfolk residents living in poverty. As Mayor Fraim stated at the Commission’s first meeting, a central purpose of the Mayor’s Commission on Poverty Reduction is to create an effective blueprint that “will have a meaningful, positive and long-lasting effect on reducing poverty in Norfolk.”12

Table 1. Individual Poverty Rate of Norfolk and Neighboring Localities, 2008–2012 13 Locality

Total Poverty Rate

Williamsburg

18.4%

Norfolk

18.2%

Portsmouth

17.5%

Virginia Beach

17.4%

Hampton

14.7%

Newport News

14.5%

Suffolk

11.6%

Virginia (state average)

11.1%

Chesapeake

8.3%

Poquoson

4.1%

This section presents demographic information on who lives in poverty in Norfolk, the educational and employment backgrounds of individuals and families in poverty, and the locations of most concentrated poverty in Norfolk. Commissioners reviewed this data, along with national literature on best practices and input from the community, to derive their recommendations, which are detailed in Section Two.14 June 2014 • 9

Demographics: Race, Gender, Age, and Marital Status Race “The poverty rate among blacks was more than twice that of whites in Virginia in 2010: 20 percent among blacks compared to 9 percent among whites.

Twenty-nine percent of black children lived in poverty in Virginia in 2010….The household income of [black Virginians] continues to trail significantly behind that of whites, despite absolute gains; and a significant differential income is found even among blacks and whites with the same level of education and number of hours worked.” 16 Norfolk’s overall racial composition is 48 percent white, 43 percent black, and 9 percent other, with a growing Asian (particularly Filipino) population.17 Minorities continue to increase as a percentage of the city’s total population.

Figure 2. Poverty in Norfolk, by Race, 2008–2012 15

Two or More Races 3%

10 • N o r f o l k P l a n t o R e d u c e P o v e r t y

Table 2. Norfolk Poverty Rate by Race, 2008–2012 18

Race

Percent of Racial or Ethnic Group Living in Poverty

Number of Individuals Living in Poverty

American Indian

36.8%

318

Some Other Race

25.1%

911

Black

24.1%

23,238

Two or More Races

18.0%

1,286

Hispanic or Latino*

17.9%

2,560*

Asian

15.1%

1,145

White

12.8%

13,518

All races

18.2%

40,416

* Because Hispanics may be of any race, the Census Bureau addresses Hispanic demographics separate from racial categories. The Census Bureau estimates that 6.3% of those living in poverty in Norfolk are of Hispanic or Latino origin, across the racial categories in the above chart.

In Norfolk, poverty and race are linked, with high levels of poverty among minorities. A given Norfolk resident experiencing poverty is most likely to be black: 58 percent of the city’s 40,000 individuals living in poverty are black, constituting 24% of all blacks living in Norfolk. Although they constitute a much smaller percentage of Norfolk’s population, other minority groups—such as Native Americans—experience disproportionately high poverty rates, as demonstrated in Table 2.19 In addition, the integration of different races in regions across Virginia has stalled in recent decades. In 2010, the Weldon Cooper Center at the University of Virginia calculated a racial dissimilarity index for the state’s three largest metropolitan areas. With a value of 0 indicating that every neighborhood was completely integrated according to a locality’s overall racial composition and a value of 100 indicating that “blacks and whites live in completely separate neighborhoods,” the Center calculated a dissimilarity value of 48 for Virginia-Beach-Norfolk-Newport News. While

the metro area was more integrated than either Richmond (value of 52) or Northern Virginia (value of 62)—and was notably more integrated than it was 50 years prior—the area still has extreme concentrations of poverty and race.

When children enter the picture and are raised by a single parent, the gender gap in poverty widens, with women falling deeper into poverty.

Residential segregation contributes directly to school segregation. According to the Weldon Cooper Center report, since blacks are more likely to be poor than whites, black Virginians living in “highly segregated minority schools have more children in poverty, more students entering school unprepared, less experienced teachers, lower test scores, and generally fewer resources,” plus less access to employment and social networks, less educational success, and poorer health outcomes.20

“For every distressing national poverty statistic, the numbers for children are worse. While one-sixth of all Americans live in poverty and one-third live in “near poverty,” with incomes below twice the poverty level, one fourth of children under age five are poor and nearly half fall into the “near poor” category.”24

Gender “Poverty rates generally stabilized in 2011 after several years of increases, as the economy slowly recovered from the Great Recession that began in late 2007—but that left poverty among women and children at or near historically high levels. Poverty rates for all groups of women were higher than for their male counterparts. The gender wage gap persisted, undermining women’s ability to support themselves and their families.” 21 Across all age groups in the United States, females have historically experienced poverty at a higher rate than males. During the nation’s economic recovery, the gap in male and female poverty has grown, with male poverty declining since 2010 while female poverty levels have held steady.22 Norfolk’s female population is also more likely to live in poverty, in line with national trends.

From 2008–2012, 19.9 percent of women and 16.5 percent of men of all ages experienced poverty.23

Age

In Norfolk and across the United States, those living in poverty are disproportionately young.

While around 20 percent of Norfolk’s population lives below the poverty level, more than one in four of Norfolk’s children experienced poverty in the last year (versus one in seven children statewide.) Over half of Norfolk residents (about 22,300) living below the poverty level are under 25 years of age, and 35 percent (about 14,000) are children under the age of 18.25 Table 3. Poverty by Age Group Norfolk, 2008–2012 26 Age

Virginia

Norfolk

Under 18 years

265,922

14.6%

14,004

27.7%

18 – 64

516,806

10.4%

23,830

16.0%

65 and older

76,304

7.9%

2,582

11.6%

All ages

859,032

11.1%

40,416

18.2%

Table 3 shows that more than one in four children under 18 live in poverty. The majority of students within Norfolk Public Schools (71 percent) are from economically disadvantaged populations, and the number increases to 84 percent for African-American families.27 Childhood poverty is particularly concerning because it has lifetime consequences.

J u n e 2 0 1 4 • 11

Poverty among adults is also concentrated in the young: locally, adults under age 25 constitute 35 percent (8,329) of all working-age adults (age 18–64) in poverty, although they constitute only 28% of Norfolk’s working age adults.29, 30 A contributing factor to the concentration of poverty among adults under age 25 is the heavy presence of the military in Norfolk. Norfolk is home to Naval Station Norfolk, the world’s largest naval base, with over 49,000 active duty military personnel in Norfolk in 2011.31, 32

male-headed households and nearly five times as likely as married couple households to live under the poverty line. Norfolk’s poverty rates by family structure mirror these national trends, as demonstrated by Figures 4 and 5.35 Norfolk’s femaleheaded households are more likely to experience poverty (with one in three such households living below the poverty line) and its male-headed and married households are less likely to live in poverty than other households across the United States.

Figure 4. Poverty by Household Structure in Norfolk, 2008–2012 34

Figure 3. Poverty by Age in Virginia and Norfolk, 2008–2012 28

Norfolk

Marital Status “Among female headed households, having at least one person in the household who works reduces the probability of being in poverty from 60 percent to 18 percent. The combined effort of work and marital status is especially large; Married families with at least one worker have a poverty rate of only 2 percent.”33 Married couples and their families are generally less likely to live in poverty than single-headed households. Female-headed households across the United States are nearly twice as likely as

12 • N o r f o l k P l a n t o R e d u c e P o v e r t y

The Census Bureau estimates that while 14.4 percent of Norfolk families live in poverty, only 4.5 percent of married couple families do. The highest rates of poverty in Norfolk are among households headed by women—households where no husband or male partner is present. At 33.8 percent, members of these households are more than twice as likely as the general populace to live in poverty. Nearly half (46.4 percent) of Norfolk’s female-headed households with children under age five live in poverty.37

Figure 5. Percentage of Virginia and Norfolk Families Living in Poverty, 2008–2012 36

and another 26% of children live between 100% and 150% of the poverty line. (The Virginia Poverty Measure is only available regionally—not for the city of Norfolk.) This accounts for a total economic insecurity rate of approximately 44% of children. About 32% of these children (or approximately 25,000 of 78,000 total children in or near-poverty) live in married-parent families.39

Female-headed households, no husband present

Workforce Characteristics: Employment Status and Educational Attainment While children in female-headed households are more likely to experience poverty, there are large numbers of children in married parent households that experience poverty in Norfolk and the Commonwealth. A recent report by the University of Virginia’s Weldon Cooper Center emphasizes the importance of looking at the number of children in poverty in both married and unmarried households.

“While children in [Virginia] single-parent families have the highest rate of poverty, almost one-half of all economically insecure children live in marriedparent families…. while marital status is relevant to rates of childhood poverty, marriage alone does not protect children from poverty. The number of children in economically insecure married-parent families in Virginia rivals the number of children in the other two family structures together.”38 Using the Virginia Poverty Measure (VPM)—a measure that estimates poverty at the sub-state level, accounting for public assistance that impacts household economic security, such as food stamps, welfare programs, and housing assistance — the report’s authors estimate that 18% of children in the West Hampton Roads region live in poverty

Employment Status Employment status is a strong predictor of poverty in Norfolk. Nearly 9 in 10 families in which someone worked full-time, year-round live above the poverty line, as demonstrated in Figure 6.

Figure 6. Family Poverty by Household Type and Employment Status in Norfolk, 2008–2012 40

Simply having a job does not remove the risk of poverty in Norfolk. To support a family of four above the poverty line within a 40-hour work week, an estimated wage of $11.32 per hour is needed. Jobs paying the minimum wage of $7.25 per hour require 62 hours of labor to support that same family.41

J u n e 2 0 1 4 • 13

Figure 7. Unemployment in Virginia and Norfolk, 2004–2013 42

Educational Attainment

10%

“[T]he two largest factors affecting poverty are educational attainment and economic opportunity.

There is a strong and direct relationship between educational attainment, earnings and employability.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that in 2012 an adult (aged 25+) with a bachelor’s degree earned about 60 percent more than an adult with just a high school diploma and was only about half as likely to be unemployed.” 45

9% 8% 7% 6% 5% 4% 3% 2% 1% 0%

In addition to individuals who are currently working, seven percent of Norfolk’s labor force is unemployed (see Figure 7), and individuals who are not currently working are more likely to live in poverty, with 30 percent of unemployed individuals experiencing poverty.43 Examining unemployment in Norfolk over the height of the economic recession (2008–2012), the U.S. Census Bureau estimated an unemployment rate of 11.6 percent for workers age 16 and older, with a particularly high unemployment rate—34.8 percent—among teenagers. Minorities were also especially likely to experience unemployment, as demonstrated in Table 4.

Table 4. Norfolk Unemployment Rate by Race, 2008–2012 44 Race

Percent of Racial or Ethnic Group Unemployed

American Indian

24.1%

Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander

19.9%

Black

15.8%

2+ races

14.4%

Some other race

13.8%

Hispanic

10.2%

White

8.0%

Asian

3.9%

Norfolk average

11.4%

14 • N o r f o l k P l a n t o R e d u c e P o v e r t y

Education is a critical factor in finding and retaining work and having the resources to move out of poverty. Yet Norfolk adults living in poverty, in large part, do not have the education required for most job openings within the city or the region: only 2.7 percent of Norfolk citizens with a bachelor’s degree or higher are unemployed, compared to 9.8 percent of residents with some college or an associate’s degree, 11.7 percent of high school graduates, and 17.8 percent of persons with less than a high school education.46 Nationally, many current and emerging jobs require some education after high school, with graduation from high school an essential qualification. The same is true in Norfolk. A recent report by the Commonwealth Institute for Fiscal Analysis notes that “almost half of all jobs in Virginia need workers with middle skills, but only about a third of workers had the proper training and credentials to fill them.”47 In the workforce development region represented by Opportunity, Inc., Norfolk has the second lowest standard high school completion rate (77 percent), after Franklin (72 percent).

Table 5. Poverty Rates by Educational Attainment, 2008–2012 48

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

Income below the poverty LEVEL

All Norfolk residents

Less than high school graduate

27.6%

14.7%

High school graduate (includes

14.9%

27.4%

Some college, associate’s degree

11.3%

32.5%

Bachelor’s degree or higher

5.0%

25.4%

GED)

Neighborhood Data “Individuals in these very high-poverty neighborhoods are segregated from the social mainstream, with diminished opportunities and norms that make it more difficult to escape poverty. Research shows that children born to poor parents in high-poverty neighborhoods have much lower odds of making it out of poverty.” 49

and have difficulty accessing high-quality child care that fits with their parents’ work schedules and transportation capacity, contributing to intergenerational transmission of poverty.50 Within the city itself, some neighborhoods have higher concentrations of poverty than others.

It is not uncommon for a neighborhood with an extremely high poverty rate (upwards of 50 percent) to sit next to neighborhoods with almost no poverty, as demonstrated in Figure 8.

Concentrated neighborhood poverty is persistent and difficult for its residents and their children to overcome.

Figure 8. Map of Individual Poverty Rate by Census Tract, 2008–2012

Concentrated poverty has a detrimental impact on individuals’ economic opportunities—such as networks, employment, and education—creating a significant barrier to addressing a community’s poverty problem. Further, children raised in high poverty areas will see fewer “examples of adults achieving economic and educational success through mainstream routes,” receive K-12 education that is less-well funded than that in wealthier neighborhoods,

J u n e 2 0 1 4 • 15

RECO M M E N DAT I O N S According to Virginia’s Poverty Reduction Task Force Report, concentrated poverty in Virginia sharply increased from 1970–1990 as a result of an “exodus of white and middle class blacks to the suburbs,” de-facto school segregation, and deindustrialization. As the economy grew, downtown revitalization became a priority in cities throughout the Commonwealth. As federal housing policies and bank lending practices changed in the 1990s, poverty decreased, but since 2000 there are signs that concentrated poverty is increasing across the state.51 In particular, poverty in Norfolk is aligned with six public housing communities. According to the Census Bureau (2008–2012 ACS estimates), the highest concentrations of poverty were in Tidewater Gardens, Calvert Square, Diggs Town, Grandy Village, Oakleaf Forest, and Young Terrace.52 In 2011, 91.7 percent of 2, 298 public housing residents were black, and 42.6 percent were families with children.

Addressing the quality of life in poor neighborhoods, race and age of the population, and access to networks, quality education, jobs, and housing is essential in crafting recommendations to reduce poverty.

“

What can and should be done to reduce poverty...

The answers depend in part of the extent to which poverty is viewed as being due to structural forces or individual behavior…Recent antipoverty policy, especially welfare reform, has placed a particular emphasis on personal responsibility.

Personal choices about work, education, and childbearing can have large effects on an individual’s future. But it is also true that children do not choose the circumstances of their birth, yet those circumstances make it more difficult to rise out of poverty. The way forward may be to balance the need for personal responsibility with a broader understanding of the structural and institutional forces that affect life chances.”53

“There is a lack of hope among residents in poverty. None of the kids play outside anymore, the basketball courts used to be filled, and now are empty.”

-Town Hall Meetings

16 • N o r f o l k P l a n t o R e d u c e P o v e r t y

The Commission organized its recommendations into the following four goal areas: (1) supporting early childhood development and parents, (2) improving the education and the career pathways of young people, (3) strengthening opportunities for adults to thrive in the workforce, and (4) revitalizing the city’s neighborhoods to create more engagement, economic opportunities, and inclusive communities. This section provides the findings for each of these areas, followed by specific recommendations and action steps.

Appendix Four includes details on the intended outcomes, suggested lead agencies, community partners, and estimated costs.

The Commissioners’ core values include access to opportunities, education, personal responsibility, and developing cost-effective solutions. As a result, they focused two of their primary strategies on improving conditions for young children and school-age children in hopes of breaking the cycle of poverty with educational and social support, as well as youth development opportunities. In the neighborhood revitalization and adult workforce development sections, Commissioners emphasized personal motivation, engagement, and accountability, as well as streamlining services to assist individuals with their job search and making education and employment resources more conveniently accessible to residents. They sought to build healthier and more inclusive neighborhoods through mixed-income housing developments and development of a sense of shared responsibility for neighborhood vitality among residents, developers, property owners, and public, private, and civic organizations. Commissioners strived to increase opportunities for residents to take personal responsibility to connect with full-time,

year-round employment opportunities, and make responsible economic and parenting decisions.

In framing their recommendations, Commissioners reviewed the research findings of poverty experts Ron Haskins and Isabel Sawhill and saw merit in reinforcing “the success sequence” for young people to avoid poverty.

The sequence the authors suggest is that young people should finish school, find a job, and wait until they are married with stable incomes prior to having children to make it more likely to earn a family-sustaining wage rather than falling into poverty.54 The Commissioners took this research into account with recommendations related to improving high school graduation rates through career pathway development and technical training, assisting men and women in finding jobs and acquiring training, providing effective out-of-school time programs to avoid early risky behavior among school-age youth, and making high quality, affordable child care readily available to low-income parents.

Within each of the four goals, Commissioners and residents prioritized the top strategies and action steps that were most likely to bring early results. Considerations included the ability to have immediate impact, the overall effect on reducing the poverty rate, and the availability of community resources and partners to get the work done. The strategies and affiliated action steps that were identified as the most critical early investments by at minimum five Commission and/or community members (selecting from the total list of twelve strategies and 32 action steps) are highlighted in bold in each of the following sections.

J u n e 2 0 1 4 • 17

E a r ly C h i l d h o o d Development Goal: Prepare young children for academic success and healthy development through effective early childhood programs.

Desired Outcome: Children will arrive at elementary school emotionally, physically, socially, and academically ready to learn.

Intended Focus: Children ages 0-5 living in neighborhoods at or below 130 percent of the federal poverty level ($15,171 for an individual or $31,005 for a family of four).55 A strong start for many of Norfolk’s children, with support from both their parents and their community, will help interrupt the cycle of generational poverty and position children to be more likely to thrive in school socially and emotionally.

Nobel laureate and expert in the economics of human development James Heckman has stated: “the accident of birth is a major source of inequality.”56 Mapping a future for Norfolk with fewer children and families living in poverty begins early—before children are born—and extends into the first five years, prior to the start of kindergarten, when children’s brains develop and soak up new information at a rapid pace. Early childhood researchers continue to accumulate evidence that effective action in a child’s earliest years has a stronger impact on the child’s success than similar efforts delivered later in childhood or youth (see Figure 9).57 In the United States, approximately half of the income inequality evident across a lifetime of earnings is due to childhood factors.58 18 • N o r f o l k P l a n t o R e d u c e P o v e r t y

In the area of early childhood, Commissioners recommend increased high quality child care for Norfolk children and their parents, greater availability of and access to evidence-based parent education and early childhood resources through community outreach and education, and the opportunity for all parents of newborns to be screened for and receive voluntary support services.

Early Childhood Development Strategies and Action Steps Strategy 1.1 Increase the number of high quality child care homes and centers, as well as access to them. ❑❑ Align state and local licensing and zoning regulations to appropriately establish child care in family homes. ❑❑ Increase the number of homes and centers that have earned Virginia’s Star Quality Initiative (VSQI) designation.

Strategy 1.2 Increase the level of quality of all systems that care for and educate children from birth to five years old. ❑❑ Implement a kindergarten readiness assessment for all children entering the school system. ❑❑ Create a high-quality universal pre-school program.

Strategy 1.3 Connect families in need with early intervention and support services.

❑❑ Implement a universal screening and referral system for all newborn children and their families citywide.

Strategy 1.4 Develop a focused outreach effort in the community and educational settings. ❑❑ Develop a public awareness and outreach campaign regarding the importance of the early childhood period and parent education resources to engage teen and young mothers and fathers, their parents, and educators. ❑❑ Ensure wide distribution of a “checklist” to assist parents and educators prepare for kindergarten.

❑❑ “Increase high school graduation by 31%, college attendance by more than 80%, and employment by 23%.”60 Controlled research on the effects over time of high-quality early childhood programs has found that program benefits—such as increased personal earnings and savings on crime and public services—to the individual and society produce rates of return from seven to 20 percent. This is far beyond what investors might expect in typical markets.61 Figure 9. Early Childhood Return on Investment (ROI) versus Later Interventions 59

❑❑ Coordinate services and outreach among nonprofit organizations, city government, community stakeholders, business and military partners, faith-based organizations, and the educational system for a unified systematic approach.

Findings Strategies 1.1. and 1.2: High Quality Early Childhood Education—Preschool and Early Care According to Ready Nation, high quality education before kindergarten has remarkable staying power, particularly for disadvantaged children.

For the same children over time, effective prekindergarten education has been shown to: ❑❑ “Decrease special education placement by 49% and reduce grade retention by 50%; ❑❑ “Decrease child abuse and neglect by 51% and juvenile arrests by 33%;

The importance of the quality of the care cannot be overstated, as day care or pre-school in and of itself is not always a positive experience for children and can impede development when the quality is poor.

During the first few years of life, it is estimated that 90 percent of the core structure of the brain develops, making this a critical time for a healthy learning environment. According to the Center on the Developing Child at Harvard University, “there J u n e 2 0 1 4 • 19

Figure 10. Returns to Investment in Early Childhood Education 62

is a 95 percent relationship between children’s language interactions with adults in the first two to three years of life and their reading level in the 4th grade.” Appropriate care and stimulation in the early years of childhood, prior to entering elementary school, helps children develop critical thinking abilities that impact not only 4th grade academic achievement, but last into adult economic outcomes.

The price tag for high-quality care also needs to be affordable to families living within 130 percent of the poverty line, so it does not price out the very families who would benefit from it the most. Frequently, the childcare hours parents need extend beyond regular business hours. For many Norfolk parents, child care is often out of reach economically and unavailable at the times of day parents need it. The poorest of Norfolk’s poor may need overnight and weekend care, transportation assistance to reach the care, and subsidies to support the costs.63 Without this support and access, children can end up in poor quality unlicensed providers or being cared for by untrained and unqualified elder siblings, neighbors, or friends.

20 • N o r f o l k P l a n t o R e d u c e P o v e r t y

Virginia’s Early Childhood Foundation, with support from the Office of Early Childhood Development in the Commonwealth, has developed the Virginia Star Quality Initiative (VSQI), a rating that distinguishes centers that are striving to, or have met, national quality standards.

The VSQI is a voluntary system that child care providers elect to participate in, providing a clear way for parents to make informed choices about care. Centers receive one of five star levels and are given tools and mentors to improve their quality and reach the highest ratings over time.

Parents are provided with a listing of local centers and their respective ratings. The VSQI feature recognizes the education and preparation of staff, quality of child-teacher interactions, class size, curriculum, and learning environments.

There are early childhood education centers in Norfolk that meet the criteria of the VSQI formula, yet they are too few and too far from the areas of high poverty where children and their families live. Instead, there is an abundance of unregulated care—less expensive and easier to get to, convenient for families in the high poverty neighborhoods, but not providing the educational, social, and health advantages of a quality, star-rated center.

The Commissioners propose to create more quality centers, communicate more effectively about the importance of high quality care, and make these centers more convenient and affordable to families in poverty. They propose making it easier to train and support existing in-home providers and child care operators to become VSQI providers and eliminate some of the City licensing requirements that discourage intended providers from opening up quality centers in high-poverty neighborhoods.

“Public libraries have wonderful pre-school

Star Rated Center

programs. How can we better market these services?”

-Town Hall Meetings

“Not all child care centers accept subsidies, and most places are not affordable.

Some families can’t afford $30 a week.”

-Town Hall Meetings

Figure 11. Location of Early Childhood Centers in Norfolk

SIMPLE BUDGET

In addition to improving the quality of child care homes and centers, the Commissioners seek to provide a high-quality, publicly-available experience for all children who enter prekindergarten in the Norfolk Public Schools. This is intended to create a level playing field for children entering schools, addressing affordability barriers without stigma for parents seeking care for their children. To address this need at the preKindergarten stage, the Commissioners propose a universal pre-school investment and support for research to know how and when a child is ready for learning at kindergarten. Norfolk Public Schools has been asked to participate in the second phase of a study, called Virginia’s Kindergarten Readiness Project—supported by Elevate Early Education, Virginia’s Department of Education, and the University of Virginia—that will pilot a statewide measure with 2,000 children.

Typical “Housing Burdened” Household (Mother with a baby and young child)

Monthly income $8/hr, 40 hr/wk

$1,281

less: rent

$700

less: utilities

$100

less: childcare for ONE child*

$500

less: transportation (30-day bus pass)

$50

Remaining for food, medical, clothes, etc.

-$69

*Unsubsidized, unlicensed. With a a fee day care subsidy this mother would pay $130/mo.

Figure 12. Sample Low-income Household Budget

As estimated by ForKids, Inc., a Norfolk-based nonprofit, a single parent working full-time at $8 an hour would pay approximately $500 a month for child care at a high quality center, effectively leaving her with nothing after rent, utilities, transportation, and food (see Figure 12). With a City-supported subsidy in Norfolk, this amount becomes $301, leaving some funds to cover basic expenses.

J u n e 2 0 1 4 • 21

Strategy 1.3: Screening Before children are born is an optimum time to connect future parents to information about child health and development, infant care, and resources available to them—such as voluntary home visiting from trained nurses or family support workers, housing, and employment opportunities. At the hospital at the time of birth, families may be most receptive to offers of quality assistance and information.

Early childhood home visiting programs provide parents and children with education and support to ensure they obtain the health services necessary for optimum child development and well-being.

Most home visiting programs deliver services such as health education, counseling, case management, medical care, and behavioral health care through both nurses and social workers who visit the home.

Recent national studies have demonstrated positive results of home visitation for young children and their parents. In the short term, benefits include better birth outcomes, early detection of developmental delays, and early literacy skills in young children; longer-term benefits include reduced child maltreatment, higher rates of high school graduation, and reduced welfare dependency.64 When coupled with primary care provision, home visitation may generate economic efficiencies, improve education and information outreach to patients, and reach high-risk families who can be difficult to engage, with positive results.65, 66 The Commissioners recommend that every family exiting the hospital have the opportunity to participate in an interview with the option to be contacted by or connected with the resources they need for their newborn baby.

22 • N o r f o l k P l a n t o R e d u c e P o v e r t y

“We need affordable daycare options for young women who are working and going to school. Parents need to have the chance to make good choices for their children and the opportunity to go back to school.”

-Town Hall Meetings Strategy 1.4: Outreach, Engagement, and Parent Education Simply creating those new structures—more high quality, affordable early education centers, opportunities for every parent of a newborn to connect with resources, and publicly-supported pre-school—will be significant. Yet, along with these innovations, Commissioners identified the importance of sharing information with residents so that they can know about the resources and make independent choices for themselves and their children. For example, while much more is known today about the importance of the brain’s development in the early years, that message is competing with multiple messages and pressures for resident attention. Commissioners seek to increase residents’ understanding of the substantial benefits these resources can have for their children through one-on-one conversations and message campaigns intended to reach low-income populations.

In town meetings organized to shape this report, residents stressed the importance of providing accessible parent education resources directed toward mothers and fathers and addressing barriers that keep individuals from attending sessions or gathering parenting information. They desired information about what it takes to be prepared for kindergarten, both for parents and early childhood education providers.

For many of these recommendations, work is well underway and supported by key organizations, individuals, and donors in the Norfolk community, such as Smart Beginnings. In PlaNorfolk2030, the City’s comprehensive plan, a core outcome is “children prepared for school” and a recommended step is to “improve the quality of learning in day care centers.”67 Norfolk has been building momentum to reach more and more children with quality services.

The Planning Council, a regional human services planning non-profit, has already begun training child care providers for the VSQI rating. The Planning

Council also hosts a regional central intake for home visiting services and supports the 211 information and referral service, which links residents to local resources. There is a proposal before City Council for an expansion of a quality pre-school initiative within the Norfolk Public Schools. Norfolk Public Library has parent education sessions, and a state pilot is in the organizational stages for a pre-Kindergarten readiness assessment. All of these organizations— and community partners such as hospitals, faithbased organizations, grass roots civic groups, and the United Way—will be essential toward achieving the overall goal for children ages 0-5 and their families.

Readiness for Ki n d e r g a rt e n C a m pa i g n s Smart Beginnings of Greater Richmond promotes school readiness and kindergarten registration together through a regional public awareness

“There needs to be a program at every

campaign combining print, television, radio, and

elementary school for 3 and 4 year

social media. Their materials include a list of tips

olds. It’s the most important group and

for preparing children for school. In the Richmond region, 15 local school divisions align their kindergarten registration date on a single day, allowing

if we don’t get it right, then we fail.”

-Town Hall Meetings

Smart Beginnings the opportunity to promote to a broad audience both the registration date and what it means to be ready for school. In 2013, 96 percent of parents surveyed reported they were better prepared to register their child as a result of the information they saw before the date. (For more, see www. yourunitedway.org/sites/yourunitedway.org/files/ Kindergarten%20Advertorial_2014.pdf.)

There are multiple “readiness checklists” and quizzes

“A checklist that addresses the school systems’ expectations of how kids can be prepared for school should be developed and disseminated to parents and day care providers in Norfolk.”

-Town Hall Meetings

available for communities to use. A guidebook that can be used nationwide is produced by Nick, Jr., called “Dora’s Beyond the Backpack Toolkit.” For more, see www.nickjr.com/printables/beyond-the-backpacktoolkit.jhtml.

J u n e 2 0 1 4 • 23

Y o u t h E d u c ati o n a n d C a r e e r Pat h way s “Too many [students] can’t see a clear, transparent connection between their program of study and tangible opportunities in the labor market.” 68 Goal: Prepare youth and young adults to secure family-sustaining employment through effective programs that address both in-school and out-ofschool factors.

Desired Outcome: Young people will graduate high school ready for higher education or a career that will assist them in achieving familysustaining employment.

Intended Population: Youth in grades kindergarten through twelve, in families living at or below 130 percent of the federal poverty level ($15,171 for an individual or $31,005 for a family of four).

Youth and Career Pathways Strategies and Action Steps One of the most important credentials for finding a job and earning a family-supporting wage is completing high school and some form of post-secondary education, such as a career and technical program, apprenticeship, or a two- or four-year degree. With this in mind, Commissioners identified ways for young people to see more connections between the value of a middle and high school education and their futures.

Creating a path or a link between school, young persons’ skills and aspirations, and the labor market is not a new challenge in Norfolk or the United States. Yet with recent years’ high

24 • N o r f o l k P l a n t o R e d u c e P o v e r t y

unemployment rates among youth of all education levels, youth workforce and career preparation has become an especially important public priority. Commissioners brought a local lens to the problem, identifying specific ways that area employers might work with schools to administer, plan, and sponsor internships, apprenticeships, and career exposure opportunities. The intent of this increased employer engagement with school representatives would be not only to expose students to an array of options, but to provide them with clear information about how to pursue these fields during and after high school and, where appropriate, place them in service and work opportunities to gain experience on-site prior to graduation.

While Commissioners did not make recommendations for reforming Norfolk Public Schools overall, they support innovative proposals to create two new schools that will help Norfolk Public Schools students prepare for the workplace—the Open Campus High School and the Career and Technical Education High School— and made recommendations for programming during after school and summertime hours at local elementary and middle schools. These initiatives are supported by the premise that they will assist those young people at risk of dropping out to re-connect with school, improve their knowledge and skills, and gain a solid footing for future career development.

The strategies and affiliated action steps that were identified as the most critical early investments by at minimum five Commission and/or community members (selecting from the total list of twelve strategies and 32 action steps) are highlighted in bold:

Strategy 2.1 Improve academic achievement for low-income elementary, middle, and high school students. ❑❑ Offer high quality out-of-school time enrichment and education programs during the summer and after school for elementary and middle school students. ❑❑ Support and replicate the P.B. Young Elementary School Pilot Model, which provides an extended school year through summer enrichment. ❑❑ Implement the Open Campus High School model that offers flexible scheduling, personal learning plans, and coaching to increase on-time graduation rates and reduce drop-out rates.

Strategy 2.2 Improve the quality and exposure to career education and skills training for Norfolk’s youth. ❑❑ Partner with Hampton Roads employers to document career pathways and develop educational content for Norfolk Public Schools. ❑❑ Develop a model and provide training in career pathways for teachers and guidance counselors. ❑❑ Engage Norfolk Public Schools middle and high school students in career option awareness, inclusive of internships and corporate work experiences. ❑❑ Approve and implement the proposed career and technical high school through

a public and private, collective impact, funding collaborative.

Findings Strategy 2.1: Out-of-School Time and Alternatives for High-Risk Youth The Value of Quality Out-ofSchool Time Programs Seventy-three percent of a young person’s time is spent out of school, with numerous out-of-school factors influencing a student’s ability to succeed in school.70 Elements that have an influence include behavioral and physical health, housing, support services, employment within the family, and stress.

Research on improving academic achievement indicates that there is value on focusing efforts not only on school time, but also on the rest of the day, where students can be in unstructured and potentially risky environments.

Effective out-of-school time programs help keep elementary and middle school students in school and more engaged in learning. According to the American Youth Policy Forum, “evidence suggests a correlation between frequent attendance in out-of-school time (OST) activities and positive outcomes, including an increase in academic achievement, school attendance, time spent on homework and extracurricular activities, enjoyment and effort in school, and better student behavior.”71Additionally, a report by Public/Private Ventures documents that student decisions to drop out of school can begin as early as middle school: “How well prepared a middle school student is

J u n e 2 0 1 4 • 25

for the transition to high school has much to do with whether he or she ultimately graduates…and is strongly related to not only the likelihood of finishing high school but also the odds of staying in college until graduation.”72Thus, keeping young people engaged in school from an early age, with the support of effective after school and summer programs, is a key recommendation of the Commission.

Norfolk’s Department of Recreation, Parks and Open Space (RPOS) offers six before and after school recreation programs at the following recreation centers: Bayview, Crossroads, Fairlawn, Sherwood Forrest, Tarrallton, and Young Terrace.

Prior to fiscal year 2015, grant-funded out-of-school time programs were available at Blair, Lake Taylor, and Lafayette-Winona middle schools with support from the federal 21st Century Learning Center.

Norfolk is also home to a pilot called the P. B. Young 2013 Summer Enrichment Program, spearheaded by United for Children Young’s Terrace and United Way of South Hampton Roads.

The goal of the program is to avoid summer learning loss and continue gains in achievement among elementary school students. The program, funded by a major local donor, and including nonprofit and public sector in-kind contributions, ran for eight weeks for five days a week in 2013 and included grade level instruction and enrichment activities sponsored by corporate and community partners. The program succeeded in its goals; students in all grades showed reading growth, rather than loss, with the exception of the third grade.

26 • N o r f o l k P l a n t o R e d u c e P o v e r t y

Figure 13. Reading Growth Results Results of PB Young 2013 Summer Enrichment Program, by Grade

The Commissioners propose to expand the P.B. Young model to all elementary schools, and to develop high quality after-school programs for all elementary and middle schools, beginning with those schools in the highest poverty neighborhoods in Norfolk.

They propose incorporating evidence-based practices in instruction and design of out-ofschool time programs, such that the quality is high, integrated with but not duplicative of the school day, and assists in reducing the achievement gap and connecting students to important social and emotional supports.

Reconnecting High-Risk Youth: the Open Campus High School In 2012–2013, 284 students in Norfolk who have either dropped out of middle school or are over age for their grade. In addition, there were 339 high school-aged students in 2012–2013 who do not meet the minimum requirements for graduation; only 165 of them have completed their GEDs (see Figure 14). These students are unprepared for work and have few credentials to rely on to find a job and build a career.

Figure 14. NPS High School Students not Meeting Minimum Requirements for 12th Grade, 2012–2013

Strategy 2.2: Career Pathway Development and Career and Technical Education Career Pathway Development

Norfolk Public Schools has proposed an effort, the Open Campus High School, to address students who are over the average age for their grade, behind on school credits, facing the risk of dropping out or already dropped out, and/or are teen parents. They have selected a location and a national firm experienced in running 17 other similar programs to design a drop-out prevention and recovery program tailored to Norfolk’s particular needs. Student education through the program will be personalized and flexible, with self-guided electronic and hands-on coursework, counseling and coaching, and preparation for post-secondary education or work. This program addresses poverty by preventing young people from falling behind early in their lives due to broken or unfinished educational paths.

Commissioners are supportive of this model as a method of preventing poverty for children at risk of dropping out of middle and high school.

“Create a sense of hope in neighborhoods.”

-Town Hall Meetings

Nationwide there is recognition that emerging jobs will require some education beyond high school.

As reported in Pathways to Prosperity, the lifetime earning gap between those with only a high school education and those with some college, estimated at $1 million in 2011, has been widening. The authors note, “[t]he message is clear: in 21st century America, education beyond high school is the passport to the American Dream.” 73 Yet it is not always four-year postsecondary education that has the greater earning power, best aligns with jobs of the future, or motivates students to complete a degree. “Middle-skill” jobs, requiring post-high school certificates or two years of training, are growing nationally and in Virginia, particularly in the health care, construction, manufacturing and natural resources fields. It is estimated that 40 percent of jobs in Virginia will fall into the middle skill sector through 2018.74 According to the Commonwealth Institute’s report on workforce development in Virginia: “Recent estimates show that almost half of all jobs in Virginia need workers with middle skills, but only about a third of workers had the proper training and credentials to fill them. The jobs requiring these skills are found in Virginia’s largest industries, including transportation, education and health care, government, and professional and business services…Over the next decade, demand for workers with critical middle skills will continue, forecasts indicate.” 75

J u n e 2 0 1 4 • 27

The authors of Pathways to Prosperity argue that “a focus on college readiness alone does not equip young people with all of the skills and abilities they will need in the workplace, or to successfully complete the transition from adolescence to adulthood.” 76 Further, they note that the college completion rate for Americans is low: “only about 4 in 10 Americans have obtained either an associate’s or bachelor’s by their mid-twenties… about 30 percent of African Americans…. and 20 percent of Latinos.” 77 Figure 15. Virginia Job Openings by Skill Level, 2008 and 2018

Commissioners envisioned a career pathways system that would require employers to become deeply engaged in multiple ways at an earlier stage in students’ development to help set standards and design educational programs of study, as well as advise young people and provide expanded opportunities for work-linked learning. Employers would become full partners in a regional effort to prepare young adults for workplace success.

According to the Commonwealth Institute, there are state efforts underway that support the Commission’s recommendations. For example, Virginia’s Department of Education has developed 19 career clusters and 79 career pathways and hosts a clearinghouse with teaching plans, technical assistance, and materials for use in each pathway. In 2008, the Commonwealth created

E f f e c ti v e S k i l l s I n v e n to ry M o d e l There is an immediate need to prepare and expose young people to a range of career opportunities— not focused exclusively on the pathway to a bachelor’s degree—many in the sectors described as requiring middle skills.

Commissioners saw the value of providing students with motivation and pathways to explore careers and gain experience in the workplace— from increased career exploration and job shadowing to internships and work-based learning outside the classroom. Early positive exposure to career opportunities is intended to help students plan for completion of high school and some post-secondary training.

28 • N o r f o l k P l a n t o R e d u c e P o v e r t y

Virginia’s Peninsula Council for Workforce Development partnered with Thomas Nelson Community College to align youth and employer workforce needs. Leadership convened regional manufacturing employers, K-12 school systems, colleges, training providers, and community organizations to analyze regional workforce needs, the federally-supported resources available, and the gaps between the skills demand and available training resources. They used this information to develop a “skills to succeed” inventory identifying eleven jobs and seven skill areas in high demand locally, with detailed wage levels, education and skill requirements, and regional training providers.

a strategic plan for the development of career pathways for youth and adults that “aligns adult basic education, job training and higher education systems to allow workers to pursue post-secondary educational degrees and other credentials while they continue to work and support their families.” 78 Integrating Norfolk’s local efforts with these state and national efforts may result in the availability of greater resources for Norfolk’s residents.

foundation as well as marketable skills relevant to the local economy. Technical high schools combine academic instruction with industrial education—with a focus on connecting youth through professional mentors, job shadowing, and field trips—that can lead to both college credit and industry certification.

The Value of a Career and Technical Education High School

E f f e c ti v e C a r e e r Pat h way Model

A group of individuals from the region’s corporate, public, and nonprofit sectors convened by the Greater Norfolk Corporation (GNC) have

Virginia is home to four Career Academies, which “link high schools with regional employers and higher education institutions to blend a college preparatory curriculum and a career focus, resulting in work-based learning that integrates practical career applications of academic subjects.

Rather than directing students down either an academic or a vocational track in high school, Career Academies emphasize both—providing students with industry and internship exposure while preparing them to pursue further training after high school….Career Academies are designed to be small learning communities of 30-60 students per grade within a traditional high school.” As Brad Wilcox of the University of Virginia points out, “Career [a]cademies…. have achieved substantial success in boosting the income and marriage rates of youth from lower-income communities.” Wilcox writes, “As economist Robert Lerman has noted, approaches like these seem to be particularly attractive to young men who do not find academic classrooms appealing, and could be easily expanded at a fraction of the amount of money now spent on college loans by the federal government.”

identified the need for a high-quality, full-time academic career and technical high school in Norfolk. They have developed and based the design on a proven model, the Worcester Technical High School in Massachusetts.

Worcester Technical High School has succeeded in increasing the on-time graduation rate, reduced the drop-out rate (to one percent in 2012–13), and increased the attendance rate of its students.

Model attributes include “high expectations and standards for all, rigorous college-preparation academics, high quality career and technical courses in high demand fields, commitment to provide students extra help, enhanced counseling and guidance, and an emphasis on work-based learning and apprenticeship opportunities, as well as partnerships with community colleges and universities.” 79 A central purpose of the high school would be to equip students with a solid academic

J u n e 2 0 1 4 • 29

The planners envision employer “anchors” for the high school to help design and support the curriculum, work exploration, and placements.

These include “local federal facilities and the Naval Base, Sentara Healthcare, Bon Secours Hampton Roads Health Care System, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Tidewater Community College, Newport News Shipbuilding, Norfolk Naval Shipyard, modeling and simulation industry, the Greater Norfolk Corporation, Opportunity, Inc., Hampton Road’s Workforce Development Board, and the Virginia Ship Repair Association.”80 Commissioners support the development of the career and technical education high school with the proviso that (1) the school be funded through a mix of public and private support and (2) special attention be focused on conducting outreach to, recruiting, and enrolling children in poverty, and subsequently providing support to low-income students to complete the degree.

“We need more school counselors with better training, especially in middle school—what is the ratio of counselors to students?”

-Town Hall Meetings

“We need to bring trade organizations and manufacturing into the equation, and have them go into the schools and show children what it means to be a shipbuilder or carpenter.”

-Town Hall Meetings

30 • N o r f o l k P l a n t o R e d u c e P o v e r t y

A d u lt W o r k f o r c e Development Goal: Help adults prepare for the workplace by expanding access to career development programs and employment support.

Desired result: Adults will gain employment at or above a living wage.

Intended population:Underemployed or unemployed adults, ages 18 and above, with a priority on residents age 18–44 without a GED or high school diploma.

A full-time job that supports a family is a fundamental tool in fighting poverty, and finding one requires both formal education and knowledge of the employment market.

Knowing what jobs are available, figuring out how to prepare for them, and having the motivation, time, and resources to pursue opportunities is key. Staying on the job, performing well, and finding opportunities to advance and increase earning power is essential to moving beyond a poverty-level wage.

Yet for many Norfolk residents, the pathway to jobs is unclear and opportunities for employment or career development are out of reach. Residents are unable to find resources, become discouraged by bureaucratic obstacles to using public resources, or simply cannot find jobs for which they are qualified. Others are unable to reach available jobs due to a lack of resources, which can include limited or unreliable transportation, inadequate clothing, disincentives related to a loss of public benefits once they reach a certain salary

level, convenient and affordable child care, and health care.

The Census Bureau estimates that Norfolk has approximately 26,412 adults at or below the poverty level, including 8,329 young adults age 18– 24. Aside from childhood, young adulthood is the period where there is the greatest concentration of poverty in Norfolk.81 The Commission’s workforce development recommendation takes into consideration the needs of this population.

In comparison with other regions, Norfolk is also home to a relatively larger number of previously incarcerated individuals. Norfolk’s municipal jail houses the largest daily population of any jail in the region—1,411 in 2013. In state fiscal year 2013, 748 offenders who had been sentenced in Norfolk were released from incarceration by the Virginia Department of Corrections. While there are not specific numbers of those previously incarcerated individuals seeking employment in Norfolk, annually there is a growing number returning to the community from prison after having been sentenced and/or having lived in Norfolk prior to incarceration. Commissioners affirmed the need to address the needs of those in the early stages of their career, inclusive of previously incarcerated

“Companies have to take some responsibility for providing resources to schools.”

-Town Hall Meetings

“We need to bring back apprenticeship programs.”

adults, and recommended an analytical study of residents’ needs and the capacity of current programs, to inform a more customized approach for the total adult population.

Commissioners’ recommendations seek to improve the way that residents connect to regional job listings and access training resources and workplace support, and to increase the use of female and minority-headed small businesses.

Commissioners also recommended the completion of a study in year one intended to shape a more targeted and efficient workforce strategy for residents. The study would be (1) an analysis of the needs of individuals seeking employment in the city, (2) an overview of the existing nonprofit and public programs providing employment and training services in the area—particularly for young adults and previously incarcerated adults—and (3) an analysis of the opportunities and barriers these organizations and individuals face in transitioning individuals into the job market. The intent would be to provide recommendations for addressing the populations with greatest needs—potentially through funds for support services and additional resources for basic literacy and/or job readiness. The end goal is to make it easier for these citizens to find and keep employment through using existing resources and/or supplementing these resources with needed services.

The strategies and affiliated action steps that were identified as the most critical early investments by a minimum five Commission and/or community members (selecting from the total list of twelve strategies and 32 action steps) are highlighted in bold:

-Town Hall Meetings J u n e 2 0 1 4 • 31

Adult Workforce Development Strategies and Action Steps Strategy 3.1 Increase information about and access to employment, education, training opportunities, and work-related resources. ❑❑ Collect resources and/or develop a guide for community employment and educational opportunities. ❑❑ Launch a public relations campaign to inform citizens and employers of available workforce resources. ❑❑ Provide resources to the libraries and other centrally-located organizations to operate as centers of access points for workforce preparation.

Strategy 3.2 Provide access, support, information, and services to adult populations living in poverty. ❑❑ Gather information to determine the local populations most in need and their most significant barriers to employment and then make recommendations to address obstacles to education and employment. ❑❑ Conduct a service asset and gap analysis of existing employment and training resources in the city to identify areas of focus. ❑❑ Consider the findings of the assessment of the Norfolk Reentry Council in finalizing recommendations for previously incarcerated adults.

Strategy 3.3 Promote workforce development resources as part of the City of Norfolk’s business retention efforts.

32 • N o r f o l k P l a n t o R e d u c e P o v e r t y

❑❑ As part of the City of Norfolk’s economic development efforts, continue to assess Norfolk businesses’ workforce needs and provide regular feedback to Opportunity, Inc. ❑❑ Encourage major public and private businesses to identify, utilize, and provide support to small women-owned and minority-owned contractors and businesses.

Fi n d i n g s Strategy 3.1: Increased access to information It is not only in Norfolk that residents are unclear how and where to access employment resources.

Nationally and at the state level, the array of diverse employment agencies and departments is confusing to individuals. As described in a recent report by The Commonwealth Institute, a lack of a clear state authority over the Commonwealth’s system and a confusing labyrinth of federal agencies have resulted in challenges connecting individuals to employment, and employers to the individuals who need the work and training: “Since 2003 multiple state reports have highlighted the need for an authority to coordinate the system’s many programs and services, which are spread across multiple secretariats and departments, in order to better meet the needs of workers and employers, enhance accountability, and assess which programs are working and which are not….None of these recommendations has ever been acted upon.”82 Further, the current state workforce development system is disconnected from the services some residents require to be able to go to work or

participate in training programs—such as child care, transportation, or health care. All of these services require stops at distinct agencies with distinct eligibility requirements, funding limitations, and time frames.83 Opportunity, Inc. and the Virginia Employment Commission are supportive of developing satellite centers for employers, workers, and residents looking for jobs to have a clear point of entry to services available at no cost. In addition, Norfolk’s Workforce Development Center, located in the Wards Corner Business District, provides employment opportunities to strengthen families, encourages personal responsibility, and helps participants receiving Temporary Assistance for Needy Families to become self-sufficient.

The kind of information and services available for employers at these sites can include assistance in finding qualified workers, information on and referral to customized training programs, labor market information, tax credits, and assignment of workforce transition teams to avoid layoffs or set up an on-site resource center. Workers and job seekers have access to “the state’s largest database of job openings,” skill assessment tools, resume writing assistance, directories of human service agencies and on-the-job training opportunities, vehicles for processing unemployment claims, and referrals to other support agencies.84 Additional services are available for trade participants and veterans, such as the development of individual employment plans, career planning assistance, short term pre-vocational services, and referrals to other public and nonprofit agencies that can support the work preparation process.

In Norfolk’s Comprehensive Plan for 2030, there is a recommendation to increase the usage of

libraries, making them places where residents can go to get assistance with a job search.

Commissioners also identified the libraries as important gateways for accessing existing resources and training opportunities and receiving support and assistance. A nearby library-based center in Chesapeake, Virginia, was considered an effective model by several Commissioners. In addition, Commissioners recommend compiling a guide for community employment and educational opportunities, inclusive of the nonprofit sector, for residents to access on-line and at the community-based workforce development centers to simplify and remove barriers to useful information.

E f f e c ti v e A d u lt B a s i c E d u c ati o n / GED M o d e l Across the nation, models are emerging which better link adult basic education (ABE) with job skills training and placement in growth industries.

Jobs for the Future, a national workforce development nonprofit, is piloting “Accelerating Opportunity” in eight states, aligning ABE teaching with jobs in growth pathways. It is based on the I-BEST model, a Washington state program where “students earn college-level professionaltechnical credits…while simultaneously increasing their basic skills. Rigorous evaluations show that I-BEST students are far more likely to earn college credits and credentials than their counterparts in regular ABE/GED/ESL programs.” In this model, basic instructors teach alongside technical faculty to prepare adults for jobs and post-secondary education.

J u n e 2 0 1 4 • 33

Strategy 3.2: Understanding Needs, Targeting Resources For most residents in Norfolk, the job market is perceived to be regional. Norfolk residents commute to localities in the Hampton Roads areas and many non-Norfolk residents work in the city. Almost a quarter of Norfolk residents work in cities other than Norfolk, Virginia Beach, Chesapeake, and Portsmouth (see Figure 16).

Thus, any solution to connecting Norfolk residents with jobs has to take into consideration that the opportunities will exist outside of the city as well as inside.

A primary gap for residents living in poverty is insufficient formal educational preparation for the job openings in the region. Residents who have dropped out of school, or who may not have a General Equivalency Diploma (GED), face a significant hurdle. Adults with low academic performance need basic education with a workforce literacy component that will help them find and keep a job. Adults with sufficient academic preparation may also need additional

occupational training or preparation for the job search—i.e., a resume, knowledge of job applications, interviewing skills, career counseling, and guidance.

The jobs in Norfolk in particular have a higher educational requirement than jobs elsewhere in the region, thus making it more likely that lower-income residents will need to travel outside of the city to find job opportunities. More than 75 percent of Norfolk job openings require a high school diploma (29.3 percent) or a bachelor’s degree (47.7 percent), and fewer than 7 percent of Norfolk job openings have no minimum educational requirement (average of 91 openings/ month). Yet of Norfolk residents in poverty, 29 percent have less than a high school degree.

Throughout the town hall meetings organized for this plan, residents identified barriers faced by individuals who were previously incarcerated.

In particular, they noted the difficulty in getting beyond the job application question requiring they report previous time in detention. They were supportive of a recent initiative by the City of

Figure 16. Locality of Employment for Norfolk Residents Norfolk’s Workforce: Location of Employment Of all Norfolk residents regardless of income

Of Norfolk residents making $1,250 per month or less

41.6% work within the City of Norfolk

40.4% work within the City of Norfolk

20.3% work in Virginia Beach

21.3% work in Virginia Beach

11.9% work in Chesapeake

12.0% work in Chesapeake

3.8% work in Portsmouth

3.8% work in Portsmouth

22.4% work in other localities

22.5% work in other localities

34 • N o r f o l k P l a n t o R e d u c e P o v e r t y

Norfolk entitled “Ban the Box,” which omits that question from job applications with the City.

Commissioners sought to conduct an inventory of the populations most in need, the services available, and the barriers that are keeping agencies and individuals from connecting to work.

In addition, the Norfolk Reentry Council will be conducting a gap analysis to assess the needs of previously incarcerated adults and it is hoped that this work will inform the work of the Commission.

In year two of the plan, it is anticipated that these studies will result in specific recommendations for improvements in the city of Norfolk.

Strategy 3.3: Linking Businesses to Workforce Services The City of Norfolk’s Department of Development has as its mission to “generate wealth for the City of Norfolk through business expansion, enhancement, and new business development complementary to our neighborhoods.” To ensure that the locally-funded workforce development and training programs are in sync with the needs of current businesses, Commissioners encouraged continued communication and joint planning between the Norfolk Department of Development, Opportunity, Inc., and area employment and training providers.

Providing more support to small minority-owned and women-owned businesses based in lowincome communities is another way to build wealth in neighborhoods and bring in greater numbers of jobs. The City of Norfolk can increase its own use of contractors and encourage major public and private entities in Norfolk to do the same—whether in construction or in other sectors and service categories.

“There are lots of empty buildings in Norfolk. Can we offer construction jobs to renovate the buildings for future use, or provide them as training sites?”

-Town Hall Meetings

E f f e c ti v e CON T R AC T I NG A model for how providing more support to women and minority-owned businesses can transform a community is found in Cleveland, Ohio. In what is characterized as a “path breaking agreement,” the nonprofit University Hospitals, an anchor institution, partnered with the mayor’s office and local trade unions to form an extensive agreement between University Hospitals and the community.

A core part of University Hospitals’ commitment was to use as many women and minority-owned businesses as possible in the construction and expansion of medical facilities. In a case study of the effort, the authors note the results: “By the project’s conclusion, some 110 minority and female-owned businesses had received contracts…..All told, more than 5,000 jobs in construction and related fields were created during the five-year period, with salaries totaling $500 million.” University Hospitals recruited minority vendors, helped minority and female-owned businesses build their capacities, encouraged large contractors to work with small firms, divided bids to be manageable for smaller companies, funded training programs for young minority residents, and engaged an evaluator to measure progress and adjust as needed.

J u n e 2 0 1 4 • 35

“Encourage people who need jobs to start small—taking entry level jobs, which can help to develop job skills, customer relations skills, and confidence needed to move up to higher level employment.”

-Town Hall Meetings

“It is a problem when someone doesn’t live near a bus stop, or the job they need to get to is outside of the bus system. The city is taking steps in the right direction with the light rail line...”

-Town Hall Meetings

Neighborhood R e v ita l i z ati o n “Poverty isolates people and communities from the economic and social mainstream. Children who grown up poor, compared to those raised in higher income families, face a greater likelihood of lifelong health challenges, less education, lower earnings, and are at greater risk of becoming a teen parent—thereby repeating the cycle with their own offspring.”85 Goal: With residents driving the process, create safe and thriving communities by increasing access to jobs, neighborhood amenities, and quality affordable homes.

Desired Outcome: Stabilized, mixedincome, mixed-use neighborhoods.

Intended Population: Residents of stressed neighborhoods with high poverty, high rental rates, and high levels of transition.

36 • N o r f o l k P l a n t o R e d u c e P o v e r t y

The neighborhood revitalization work group was formed because research and experience indicated that in Norfolk, families and individuals living in poverty are concentrated in distressed neighborhoods. Commissioners believe in fundamentally changing the housing mix and the resources and opportunities available to residents in low-income neighborhoods. To inform their recommendations, they looked at data on local housing patterns and economic and social conditions in neighborhoods and then designed recommendations intended to reduce concentrations of poverty and create more economic and social stability. The Commissioners’ recommendations are founded on a commitment to build leadership among residents, gain trust among citizens, and incorporate the voices of residents into City policies and plans.

Commissioners recommend stabilizing stressed neighborhoods by expanding the City’s rental inspection program, strengthening commercial corridors, building resident capacity to solve neighborhood problems, and adopting a proven comprehensive community revitalization initiative.

Another primary recommendation is to address the lack of affordable home ownership and rental units, and to help finance the development of mixed-income communities through an affordable housing trust fund. Commissioners also identified the need for the City Council to develop proactive policies to facilitate the deconcentration of poverty in Norfolk’s public housing communities.

In the Norfolk community, there are national models of communities that have been transformed—such as Broad Creek—and innovative community planning efforts underway in areas such as Park Place. The Broad Creek

Neighborhood Revitalization Strategies and Action Steps

“Workforce programs like Opportunity, Inc., are good but it’s often a struggle for lowincome folks to march through the hoops required to obtain services.”

-Town Hall Meetings

revitalization, initiated in 2000, has resulted in a mixed-income community where the differences between housing types is invisible to the outside eye. The public and private community has invested in this area with resources such as a linear park, the state-of-the art Ray and Joan Kroc Community Center, and a new regional library.86 As part of the transformation, the Norfolk Redevelopment and Housing Authority relocated 553 public housing residents.

While Broad Creek is seen as a model across the country, a number of residents brought up concerns about the process of redevelopment in citizen meetings. In particular, not all public housing residents were able to remain at Broad Creek, and there is lingering distrust and concern about future public and private efforts to deconcentrate poverty.

The strategies and affiliated action steps that were identified as the most critical early investments by at minimum five Commission and/or community members (selecting from the total list of twelve strategies and 32 action steps) are highlighted in bold:

Strategy 4.1 Stabilize stressed neighborhoods through community revitalization and economic development. ❑❑ Build capacity of residents by expanding Neighbors Building Neighborhoods program. ❑❑ Strengthen community corridors connected to distressed neighborhoods. ❑❑ Expand Norfolk’s rental inspection program to raise the quality of rental units and increase the accountability of absentee landlords, informed by promising practices. ❑❑ Form an interdisciplinary group of citizens and organizations responsible for selecting and adopting proven high-impact community revitalization strategy.

Strategy 4.2 Develop mixed-income housing and mixed-use communities in distressed neighborhoods. ❑❑ Develop a citywide and regional housing plan, including implementation strategies, to ensure an adequate supply of quality and affordable housing. ❑❑ Establish a regional Housing Trust Fund to finance quality affordable housing in the region. ❑❑ Create and implement a public education campaign on the benefits, best practices, and positive outcomes of affordable and mixedincome housing.

J u n e 2 0 1 4 • 37

Strategy 4.3 Create policies to facilitate the deconcentration of poverty in Norfolk’s public housing communities. ❑❑ Establish an affirmative policy to deconcentrate poverty by creating opportunities for residents to transition from government-owned, dense public housing to privately-owned housing in mixed-income neighborhoods. ❑❑ Establish a policy to deconcentrate clusters of poverty through regulatory methods, including zoning ordinances.

Fi n d i n g s Strategy 4.1: Stabilize Stressed Neighborhoods Community Revitalization Nationally there is a movement to go beyond traditional economic development in neighborhoods and seek to transform a neighborhood, inclusive of its housing, educational resources, workforce development opportunities, transportation systems, and social and emotional health of the residents. There are multiple national models and each supports crosssector participation and investment by public, nonprofit, philanthropic and private organizations; comprehensive approaches that address the quality of life overall; strong resident leadership and engagement; and a mix of innovative financing, inclusive of grants, below market rate loans, and commercial debt. Two national models—Purpose Built Communities and the Integration Initiative— were identified as best suited for the city of Norfolk.

38 • N o r f o l k P l a n t o R e d u c e P o v e r t y

In a report describing national neighborhood revitalization efforts, Bridgespan describes Purpose Built Communities as an effort that began by transforming a public housing complex in Atlanta, Georgia to a thriving, mixed-income community over twenty years. Market rate housing is built immediately next to affordable housing units for low-income families with the intended impact of creating a safer community with greater employment, more middle-income families, new commercial establishments and “100 percent high school graduates prepared for post-secondary education that will ultimately lead to living wages and better jobs.” 87 “In 1995, 40 percent of the units at East Lake Meadows were unlivable, the crime rate was 18 times the national average, and the employment rate was 13 percent. By 2008, the same area had 100 percent high quality units, a crime rate 50 percent lower than the rest of the city, and a 70 percent employment rate for adults who receive public housing assistance.” 88 The authors note further that “maintaining a significant number of units and opportunities for low-income families over a sustained period of time is a critical element of the Purpose Built Communities model. As such, the mixed-income community is intended to serve as a platform for low-income families to transform their lives.” 89 A national model called the Integration Initiative was also reviewed. The Integration Initiative has been successful in Newark, New Jersey with the intent of “helping cities generate sustainable opportunities for low-income people in the nation’s most historically disadvantaged urban areas.” The Integration Initiative relies on a common table for decision makers to design and plan the revitalization of a targeted neighborhood,

with similarity to the approach taken by the Commission in developing this report.

Commissioners recommended establishing an interdisciplinary work group to identify an appropriate neighborhood for one of these comprehensive models and pursue the planning, advocacy, and fundraising necessary to transform a Norfolk neighborhood.

Resident Leadership An essential part of effective neighborhood revitalization efforts is authentic participation of residents, and it is also one of the most challenging pieces to sustain and do well. Community revitalization initiatives are more likely to establish legitimacy and achieve results when they engage residents in effective organizing, outreach, and participation. Resident engagement can encourage trust, mobilize interest, empower citizens, and motivate sustained involvement and ownership of the neighborhood improvements. Residents bring multiple resources to the table: ❑❑ crucial information—residents possess a deeper understanding of community needs, assets, and history; ❑❑ mobilization capacity—residents have established relationships and channels of communication and can reach people in the community who might be less open to formal or institutional outreach; and ❑❑ political power—residents are citizens and can gain the attention of political leaders.90 The City of Norfolk has a strong focus on engaging residents in its neighborhood planning efforts and developing citizens’ leadership skills. To address

“Norfolk must stop moving pockets from one area to the next. We need to break the cycle of only placing multifamily housing and Single Room Occupancy (SRO) housing in places that already have it.”

-Town Hall Meetings this, Norfolk has invested in a City program called Neighbors Building Neighborhoods.91 Through Neighbors Building Neighborhoods, residents help solve problems, improve their relationships, and work to bring about improvements in local properties and landscapes. The program seeks to create neighborhoods where people choose to live and feel invested in the community, value their relationships with other neighbors, and have a sense of hopefulness and ownership about the future of the neighborhood. Commissioners recommend expansion of Neighbors Building Neighborhoods, particularly in the neighborhood(s) targeted for the comprehensive community revitalization initiatives.

Commercial Corridors In addition to engaging residents and transforming neighborhoods, Commissioners sought to improve the gateways and commercial corridors that surround neighborhoods with concentrated poverty. One of the preliminary ways in which the City of Norfolk has tackled this in the past is through a Better Block program. Team Better Block, a Texas-based company, “works with cities, developers, and stakeholders to create quick, inexpensive, high-impact changes that improve and revitalize underused properties and highlight the potential for creating great ‘Complete Streets.’” 92 The outcomes of these participatory J u n e 2 0 1 4 • 39

“We need to raise the level of accountability for all parties involved in property maintenance—homeowners and absentee landlords, and code inspectors need to be accountable.”

-Town Hall Meetings planning sessions include new land uses and accompanying zoning changes, changes in the streetscape, additional crosswalks and small parks, traffic calming techniques, as well as pop-up retail opportunities. Norfolk has held two Better Block events, one related to the Arts District (April 2013) and the other for 35th Street within the Park Place neighborhood (October 2013). These events may be followed by an infrastructure plan, zoning ordinance, and economic development incentives necessary to implement the visions of property owners, business owners, and interested citizens in consultation with the City of Norfolk.

Commission members recommend Better Block events to engage residents in envisioning how the traditional commercial corridors in their neighborhoods linking downtown and low-income neighborhoods might be designed in anticipation of attracting more businesses or developers, and becoming more walkable and welcoming.

Planning for these events should take financial resources into consideration, so that public and private contributors will be ready to act upon residents’ suggested changes and refurbish the corridor. A process of identifying the blocks and engaging neighbors in the research and design prior to the event would need to begin in year one, with improvements following thereafter.

40 • N o r f o l k P l a n t o R e d u c e P o v e r t y

Rental Inspection Commissioners reviewed two model “rental inspection” programs—one in Williamsburg, Virginia, and the other in Boston, Massachusetts.

In Boston, the City passed an ordinance in 2012 that requires all rental units be registered, with inspections every five years (to address the transitory nature of property ownership.)93 The goal is to “maximize the effectiveness of City resources in rental property code enforcement.” 94 The City prioritizes problem properties to target chronic offenders.

Nearby, the City of Williamsburg, Virginia launched a similar model, focused on four districts rather than a universal program, with inspections every four years. In 2003, the program was also established by City ordinance to address areas that “have exhibited the highest number of complaints and/or code violations, the highest number of known rental units, and in areas that have some of the oldest city housing that require additional maintenance attention.” 95 Commissioners recommend revamping Norfolk’s rental inspection program to help reduce blight, address abandoned and poorly managed properties, and improve the overall quality of properties in distressed neighborhoods. There are several key elements that are necessary to make this program effective in Norfolk, including mandatory owner registration, a mechanism to inspect smaller multifamily dwelling units and duplexes, as well as the ability to fine repeat offenders. In addition, it will be important to review the three existing rental inspection districts to ensure that the locations are still relevant. Additional districts can be added with the approval of City Council.

Strategy 4.2: Housing Housing Plan Commissioners recommend the development of a citywide and regional housing plan, grounded in common guiding principles for improving Norfolk’s assisted housing programs and homeownership.

Among its components, the plan would assess the needs for assisted rental housing, identify goals for future improvement or demolishment of public housing units, establish the number and type of affordable multi-family rental units desired, improve supportive services for residents, build relationships with property owners and developers, identify and pursue financial sources, and establish means for evaluating and tracking progress.

Housing Trust Fund Across the country, municipalities are setting up housing trust funds to support quality and affordable housing. These funds are intended to promote economic development, build and stabilize vibrant neighborhoods, and provide stability for children to help them succeed in school. Trust funds can be used flexibly to address local goals, providing home ownership and affordable rental units for the very poor in a community, and can leverage other funding. To establish a trust fund, the Norfolk City Council would need to pass legislation or an ordinance that identifies how the fund will be administered and governed, the use of funds (program requirements and eligibility), and how the trust will be funded (through dedicated revenue sources). ForKids, Inc., a local organization spearheading a regional effort to establish a housing trust fund, has recommended an approach that provides a blend

of loans (approximately 20 percent) and grants for long-term sustainability based on successful models in Chicago, Illinois and Columbus, Ohio.

Revenue sources that have been tapped for housing trust funds in other communities include document recording fees, real estate excise tax, sale of public land, building permit fees, parking garage proceeds, and other fees and taxes. In Columbus, Ohio, the City used a hotel tax, and the neighboring county used a real estate transfer tax to commit to a joint regional fund of $14.5 million in 2001.

Commissioners recommend that Norfolk establish a housing trust fund with an emphasis on developing mixed-income communities and promoting home ownership and housing stability among low-income families.

Public Awareness and Engagement To garner resident and policy leaders’ support in promoting mixed income housing, Commissioners recommend a public education campaign, informed by best practices. A recent study by the Center for Housing Policy notes, for example, that the most successful messages show the benefits of affordable housing for the whole community, yet underscore the importance of providing assistance

“We need to do something to stop displacement of residents when we eventually tear down the public housing communities. Often times the former residents can’t afford to come back even if there is space for them.”

-Town Hall Meetings

J u n e 2 0 1 4 • 41

to specific populations, such as “working families” or young people just starting out. The authors note that a message of high housing costs resonate with residents, as do strategies that promote home ownership, and appeal to “core values such as choice, hard work, balance, fairness, and opportunity.”96 A 25th Anniversary plan authored by ForKids, Inc., released in May 2014, includes similar recommendations for Norfolk that include (1) educating the community about housing affordability and its impact on the South Hampton Roads economy, its people, and its neighborhoods and (2) establishing a regional housing trust fund for South Hampton Roads.97

revitalization areas, the City has improved impacted areas, but also further concentrated lower-income residents.”98 A major step to create more fair housing opportunities will be to expand the availability of affordable housing in areas of median or high income in Norfolk, and to consider new family and mixed-income housing outside areas of concentrated poverty. 99

“We need affordable housing to keep qualified teachers in Norfolk.”

Strategy 4.3: DEconcentration of Poverty As Norfolk works to decrease poverty, Commissioners recognized that the concentration of low-income residents in government-owned, dense, public housing was a significant cause of continued poverty and urged its leaders to develop specific policies to facilitate the transition to privately-owned housing in mixed-income neighborhoods. It was also stressed that the City of Norfolk should consciously avoid policies that would inadvertently further concentrate and entrench resident poverty. The methods to accomplish this goal would include a combination of public and private financing, the development of transition plans for existing residents, and regulatory efforts including zoning ordinances.

As documented in a 2011 analysis of fair housing in the region: “By focusing both community development initiatives and affordable housing in identified neighborhood

42 • N o r f o l k P l a n t o R e d u c e P o v e r t y

-Town Hall Meetings

“Neighborhood pride needs to return: clean up the graffiti, trash, broken windows, and environment.”

-Town Hall Meetings

“There needs to be an emphasis on home ownership, not rental assistance.”

-Town Hall Meetings

“We need to address the issue of the wealth gap through ‘transformational assets.’

Historically, black communities have had structural barriers to home ownership. “ -Town Hall Meetings

THE A P P ROACH

Future Work

❑❑ Develop and implement a public awareness campaign to promote knowledge and use of effective programs. ❑❑ Improve consumer access to available resources.

Cross-Cutting Strategy 2: Coordinate the implementation of the plan to reduce poverty. ❑❑ Establish a coordinating structure to facilitate, advocate for, and identify ongoing support for plan recommendations. ❑❑ Collect and share data on progress to reduce poverty in the City of Norfolk.

F u t u r e Wor k In order to implement the plan, the Commissioners established two overall strategies that are relevant for achieving all four goals. These cross-cutting strategies are aimed at increasing usage and raising awareness about existing services in the four areas of the plan, and creating an organizational structure that will guide the plan’s implementation. The intent is to engage Norfolk citizens in reducing poverty through a participatory and focused effort which will result in measurable change.

Cr o s s C u tti n g Str at e g i e s Cross-Cutting Strategy 1: Increase awareness and use of available resources and ways to improve the health of Norfolk children, families, and neighborhoods.

The remainder of this section includes a recommended structure for implementation.

This organizational structure would support the implementation of the two cross-cutting recommendations and would facilitate the convening, reporting, and advocacy necessary for implementing the plan’s goals and strategies.

Recommended Or g a n i z ati o n a l Str u c t u r e The Commissioners have identified goals and strategies that are ambitious, focused on reducing poverty, and dependent upon broad-based support. Since the Mayor and City Council members first convened members, the 34 Commissioners have shared a diverse range of viewpoints, as well as engaged 200 residents in vetting and refining their work. Retaining this broad-based ownership and participation is a central consideration in recommending a coalition model for implementation.

J u n e 2 0 1 4 • 43

Communitas Consulting recommends establishing an intermediary office that is supported financially by the non-profit sector, the City of Norfolk, and the private sector, demonstrating comprehensive buy-in from the start to launch the implementation of this plan (for more detail, see Appendix 1). While the office need not be permanent, it can play a catalyst role in moving ahead with the tasks set out in the report.

Fi n d i n g s Two types of organizational structures were explored through a review of national literature and telephone interviews—city government offices that were established to implement similar plans to reduce poverty, and community-based coalitions of multiple organizations (public and private) established to reduce poverty and/or to address a targeted goal. While the work of similar commissions to reduce poverty is relatively recent with limited evaluation, there is a growing set of research on effective interagency collaborations and what it takes to “move the needle” on improving broad community indicators such as poverty levels, teen pregnancy and graduation rates, and reductions in crime. At the same time, most all of these comprehensive initiatives are relatively new (one of the oldest cited being from 1995, and more frequently the mid-2000s) and can be described as being on the cutting edge of social change. One publication describes these initiatives as “the next generation of community revitalization” initiatives.100 Both City government-run offices and independent community-based coalitions benefit

44 • N o r f o l k P l a n t o R e d u c e P o v e r t y

from having a strong champion who can bring sector leaders together, lend his or her credibility and influence to the effort, and cut through organizational barriers to facilitate the work.

Both require the capacity of well-managed public and non-profit partner agencies that are capable of carrying out the reforms, tracking outcomes, and achieving identified performance measures.

Each needs to have a strong mechanism for welcoming and integrating resident involvement in the structure to inform and shape actions on the ground and at the policy level. Each needs to foster coordination of services and minimize duplication of efforts, with a clear point of contact and coherent strategy.

In recommending a coalition model, rather than a City office, Communitas Consulting considered the following elements: ❑❑ Scope. No one office or sector can do the work anticipated by the Norfolk Mayor’s Commission on Poverty Reduction on its own. Success of the plan requires a multisector alliance and investment from public, nonprofit, private and charitable sectors. ❑❑ Momentum. Much of the work recommended by the Mayor’s Commission on Poverty Reduction has begun or has identifiable community nonprofit and private sector partners who can and will take the lead in Norfolk. A coalition model builds on these efforts and can focus on better coordinating tactics. It reduces the risk of the public considering that the City is “taking care of it.” ❑❑ Cost. The price tag for any one sector to complete the Norfolk plan is formidable.

While this is understandable given the goal to reduce poverty, funds need to be directed strategically to a limited number of highprofile, high-impact initiatives across sectors to be sustainable over the long haul, given the plan’s ten-year trajectory. ❑❑ Precedent. Once a lead investor, always a lead investor. Successful coalitions across the country have been funded through foundations, City government, private sector leadership, and in-kind nonprofit support. The responsibility for offices funded primarily by cities has remained in City hands, with some supplementary support from state and federal grants and community partners. ❑❑ Engagement. A convener with a strong capacity to engage residents at the neighborhood level is an important element of the model. In some cases, this may be the City of Norfolk; in other cases, trust and engagement may be more likely with community-based and/or faith-based groups. A coalition model leaves open the possibility of multiple forums for building relationships, trust, and conducting outreach.

A 2011 study of “needle moving collaboratives”— ones that have resulted in progress on a key community-wide indicators of ten percent or more—confirms the following characteristics as fundamental: “commitment to long-term involvement; involvement of key stakeholders across sectors; use of shared data to set the agenda and improve over time, and engagement of community members as substantive partners.”101

The authors emphasize the joint funding and planning role: “Funders need to be at the table from the beginning to help develop the goal and vision and, over time, align their funding with the collaborative’s strategies.”102 The recommended structure is informed by the work of researchers at Bridgespan and Wellspring Consulting, who have studied effective coalitions and their ability to improve conditions and leverage additional talent and funding. In these effective structures, the leader of the structure is more akin to a convener and facilitator than a “czar” or City department head, yet has direct access to and influence with the Mayor and City Manager. He or she has the ear and access to public and private leaders who are influential and can move the plan forward, as well as provide the structure to get work groups moving on items.

The following organizational framework comes from a study of five “highly effective multiorganization alliances” produced by Wellspring Consulting, a strategy consulting firm for the nonprofit sector.103 The authors recommend a set of committees, with staffing support including the following components: Executive council—influential community leaders with equal public/private leadership and investment ❑❑ Deploys human and financial resources ❑❑ Keeps track of big picture ❑❑ Monitors progress ❑❑ Builds broad community support J u n e 2 0 1 4 • 45

Leadership team—point persons and leaders of organizations participating in alliance ❑❑ The hub of the alliance ❑❑ Takes responsibility for meeting goals ❑❑ Invites new participants aligned with goals to contribute resources Program management teams— managers from key organizations in the alliance to do the work ❑❑ Responsible for implementing specific strategies within the report ❑❑ Teams design and oversee projects (action steps) ❑❑ Projects have agreed upon start and end dates, deliverables and outcomes ❑❑ May require project work groups to accomplish the work (can be pre-existing work groups, committees, and teams in Norfolk) Coordinating leader ❑❑ Skilled staff person/s to help alliance with tool to accomplish goals ❑❑ Provides structure, tracks progress, connects committees and work groups

meetings, keeps members informed about current progress, and maintains relationships with the broader partner group”104 Community engagement mechanisms ❑❑ Staff develop ways to hear from residents— ongoing (committee participation, leadership) and as needed (focus groups, advice) ❑❑ Meet regularly with project staff or project work groups to trouble shoot, evaluate progress, and provide assistance 105 Regardless of whether this recommended committee structure is followed strictly, research confirms the need for an influential steering committee and working groups, staffed by an “honest broker” or effective convener. The role of the public sector is central; however, it is not generally the primary organizational sponsor of the initiative: “While the honest broker role in a collaborative typically is filled by nonprofit leaders, rather than a government official, a highly engaged public sector is almost always critical to success….In other words, mayors, legislative leaders, school superintendents or police chiefs are needed to bring together city officials, influence funding, and enact critical policy changes.”106

❑❑ Manages communication between the alliance and with the community ❑❑ “Creates agendas, facilities the steering committee, pushes the work ahead between

“We must communicate and educate our citizens on the opportunities and resources offered in the city.”

46 • N o r f o l k P l a n t o R e d u c e P o v e r t y

“Adults need more information about what is offered in the community and the communication must be targeted to them.”

N e x t St e p s This plan is intended to reduce poverty in Norfolk.

Like its inception, its future will depend on bringing people together from across sectors and neighborhoods, with a blend of public, nonprofit, and charitable resources to implement a shared vision of Norfolk’s future.

This is not a comprehensive plan to address all aspects of poverty; it is a plan to act upon four goals that cannot be achieved by any one organization alone and that will make a measureable difference in the quality of life for Norfolk’s citizens, particularly those living at or below 130 percent of the poverty level.

From the onset, Commissioners were challenged

by Mayor Fraim to identify a limited number of solutions. Along the way, they made difficult choices and prioritized the four goals and recommended strategies. Many excellent ideas were omitted in the process of developing a plan that is fundable, informed by best practices, is not duplicative of existing efforts, and can be achieved through the collective efforts of the Norfolk community.

It is a plan that is intended to increase the number of children receiving quality and affordable child care, grow the number of young people who graduate understanding and prepared for the job market, spark a greater number of housing

developments where people with low-incomes live next to middle-class families and jobs, and make it easier for residents to find education and jobs through local organizations. All these steps, supplemented by the ongoing work of the community, public policies, and community resources, are intended to help residents earn a family-sustaining wage and break through the poverty line.

Reducing poverty is an essential part of building a vital and healthy Norfolk for all residents, not only those in poverty. In this plan there are roles and responsibilities for industries, schools, government, nonprofit agencies, foundations, civic groups, and individuals, children and families—for all have a stake in a better future.

The time of study is over, and the time for action has come.

“The schools are diverse and then students come home to homogenous neighborhoods. We need more mixed income housing.”

-Town Hall Meetings

J u n e 2 0 1 4 • 47

ACK N O W LED G E M E N T S

Undertaking a study of this scope and length necessitates the personal investment and expertise of many individuals. First and foremost, the members of the Commission are an exceptional and committed group. Not only did they participate in shaping the plan through extensive meetings over nine months, they volunteered their time beyond the meetings to research, refine the recommendations, tour facilities, organizations, and neighborhoods, and otherwise become more active experts in turning around Norfolk’s poverty rate. They are listed in the beginning of this report.

The City of Norfolk dedicated a team of talented, resourceful, and well-informed staff members to assist with the research and work group process. Susan Perry, Management Analyst for the City Manager, led the City’s internal efforts and served as the primary point of contact with the community, the consultant, and the Commissioners for the project. She was joined by the following team of experts: Nora Farrell, Brittany Forman, Oneiceia Howard, Janice Hurley, Meisha Holmes, Michelle Johnson, Vonda Johnson, Terri Raymond, and James Rogers.

Mayor Paul D. Fraim, Vice Mayor Angelia Williams and Councilmember Andy Protogyrou championed the work of the Commissioners, opened and closed each session with Commissioners, attended town hall meetings, passed legislation supporting the report’s recommendations, and inspired Commissioners to invest in the process and create real change throughout the year.

The following individuals provided generously of their time through individual meetings, workgroup sessions, sharing data, presenting to the Commissioners, and otherwise building the knowledge and improving upon the recommendations: John Andrews, City of Norfolk Wynter Benda, City of Norfolk Barry Bishop, Greater Norfolk Corporation Christopher Bettis, Indigent Defense Commission, Norfolk Office of the Public Defender Michael Cassidy and Jeff Connor-Naylor, The Commonwealth Institute Jacqueline D. Hale, United Way of Greater Richmond & Petersburg Donna Jean Foster Gill, Tamarack Institute, Canada Kenyetta Goshen, Norfolk Public Schools Ron Haskins, Brookings Institution, Washington, DC Steve Hawks, City of Norfolk Kelly King Horne, Homeward, Richmond

48 • N o r f o l k P l a n t o R e d u c e P o v e r t y

Thomas Johnson, Jr., Wilcox and Savage, P.C.

ENDNOTES

Rodney Jordan, Park Place & Norfolk School Board

1 Paul Fraim, “Mayor’s State of the City Speech Outlines Successes and Plans for Norfolk,” Fraim for Mayor, accessed May 9, 2014, http://mayorfraim.com/2014/03/mayors-state-of-the-city-speechoutlines-successess-and-plans-for-norfolk/.

Jamilah LeCruise, Indigent Defense Commission, Norfolk Office of the Public Defender

2 130 percent of the federal poverty level calculated using the guidelines available at “2014 Poverty Guidelines,” Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, U.S. Department of Health and Human Resources, accessed May 29, 2014, http:// aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/14poverty.cfm.

Andrea Kane, National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy

3 David Chrislip, The Collaborative Leadership Fieldbook (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2002).

John Kownack, Norfolk Redevelopment and Housing Authority (NRHA)

4 James Fallows, “Why Cities Work Even When Washington Doesn’t,” The Atlantic, March 19, 2014, accessed May 19, 2014, http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/04/ the-case-for-strong-mayors/358642/.

Shuri Montgomery, Norfolk Redevelopment and Housing Authority (NRHA) Christine Morris, City of Norfolk Sarah Paige Fuller, Community Services Board, City of Norfolk Jeff Raliski, City of Norfolk Annie Rorem, Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service Robert Sharak, Opportunity, Inc.

5 City of Norfolk, “Chapter 5: Enhancing Economic Vitality.” In plaNorfolk2030: The General Plan of the City of Norfolk, March 26, 2013, accessed May 19, 2014, http://www.norfolk.gov/index. aspx?nid=1376.

“Workforce Training,” Norfolk Department of Development, accessed June 13, 2014, http://norfolkdevelopment.com/index. php?option=com_content&view=article&id=203&Itemid=170.

Data from Bureau of Economic Analysis 2011 employment calculations.

6

2013 Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages, Virginia Economic Commission, accessed June 13, 2014, https://data. virginialmi.com/vosnet/MenuLandingPage.aspx?.

7

“Table DP03, Selected Economic Characteristics,” U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates for 2005–2012, accessed May 29, 2014, http://factfinder2.census.gov.

8

Paul Fraim, “Mayor’s State of the City Speech Outlines Successes and Plans for Norfolk,” Fraim for Mayor, accessed May 9, 2014, http://mayorfraim.com/2014/03/mayors-state-of-the-city-speechoutlines-successess-and-plans-for-norfolk/. Figure from “Table DP03, Selected Economic Characteristics,” U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates for 2005–2012, accessed May 29, 2014, http://factfinder2.census.gov.

9

Shereka Spencer, ForKids, Inc. Michael Wasserberg, City of Norfolk Brad Wilcox, University of Virginia, Charlottesville Thad Williamson, City of Richmond

“Table S1701: Poverty Status in the Past Twelve Months,” U.S. Census Bureau 2008–2012 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, accessed April 25, 2014, http://factfinder2.census.gov.

10

“Table S1701: Poverty Status in the Past Twelve Months,” U.S. Census Bureau 2008–2012 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, accessed April 25, 2014, http://factfinder2.census.gov.

11

Youth and Career Pathways Subject Matter Experts: Donnell Brown, Norfolk Redevelopment and Housing Authority

12

Denise Charbonnet, Norfolk Public Schools, Secondary Schools

13

“Remarks by Mayor Paul D. Fraim, Poverty Reduction Task Force Organizational Meeting,” July 11, 2013, accessed May 13, 2014. http://www.norfolk.gov/DocumentCenter/View/8462.

“Table S1701: Poverty Status in the Past Twelve Months,” U.S. Census Bureau 2008–2012 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, accessed April 25, 2014, http://factfinder2.census.gov.

Most frequently, the poverty rate in the Data section of the Plan report is stated as 14.4% for families and 18.2% for individuals.

14

J u n e 2 0 1 4 • 49

These are the estimates the U.S. Census Bureau created from its most recent five years of data (the American Community Survey’s 2008–2012 5-year estimates). At times, the individual poverty rate is listed as 16.4%, in accordance with ACS one year estimates for 2012. Because the methods used to create poverty estimates vary across data products, there will be slight differences in poverty rates in the few cases where the data presented in this report were obtained from non-ACS sources.

“Table S1703: Selected Characteristics of People at Specified Levels of Poverty in the Past Twelve Months” and “Table S1701: Poverty Status in the Past Twelve Months,” U.S. Census Bureau 2008–2012 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, accessed April 25, 2014, http://factfinder2.census.gov.

15

Michele Claibourn, “Blacks in Virginia: Demographic Trends in Historical Context,” Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service, page 12–13, accessed May 13, 2014, http://www.coopercenter.org/sites/ default/files/publications/NC_Blacks-in-Virginia_4_30_12.pdf.

16

“Table S1701: Poverty Status in the Past Twelve Months,” U.S. Census Bureau 2008–2012 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, accessed April 25, 2014, http://factfinder2.census.gov.

26

Slide 33, Youth and Career Pathways Presentation of data from Norfolk Public Schools, Youth and Career Pathways presentation, October 2013.

27

“Table B17001: Poverty Status in the Past 12 Months by Sex by Age,” U.S. Census Bureau 2008–2012 American Community Survey 5-year Estimates, accessed May 13, 2014, http://factfinder2.census. gov.

28

“Table B17001: Poverty Status in the Past 12 Months by Sex by Age,” U.S. Census Bureau 2008–2012 American Community Survey 5-year Estimates, accessed May 13, 2014, http://factfinder2.census. gov. If adults age 65 and older are included in the calculation, persons age 18–25 constitute 32% of all adults living in poverty in Norfolk.

29

“Table B01001: Sex by Age,” U.S. Census Bureau 2008-2012 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, accessed June 11, 2014, http://factfinder2.census.gov.

17

“Table DP05: ACS Demographic and Housing Estimates,” U.S. Census Bureau 2008–2012 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, accessed April 25, 2014, http://factfinder2.census.gov.

30

18

“Table S1701: Poverty Status in the Past Twelve Months,” U.S. Census Bureau 2008–2012 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, accessed April 25, 2014, http://factfinder2.census.gov.

31

Norfolk residents classified as American Indian or Some Other Race by the Census Bureau also disproportionately experience poverty, but both of these groups constitute a relatively small sliver of the population.

32

19

Michele Claibourn, “Blacks in Virginia: Demographic Trends in Historical Context,” Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service, pages 4–5, accessed May 13, 2014, http://www.coopercenter.org/ sites/default/files/publications/NC_Blacks-in-Virginia_4_30_12. pdf.

20

Insecure & Unequal: Poverty and Income among Women and Families 2000-2011. National Women’s Law Center, page 1, accessed June 14, 2014, http://www.nwlc.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/ nwlc_2012_povertyreport.pdf.

21

Jeffrey Hayes, Barbara Gault, and Heidi Hartmann. “Quick Figures: Gender Poverty Gap Grows in Recovery,” Institute for Women’s Policy Research, September 2013, accessed June 14, 2014, http://www.iwpr.org/publications/pubs/gender-poverty-gap-growsin-recovery-mens-poverty-dropped-since-recession-womenspoverty-stagnates.

22

“Table S1701: Poverty Status in the Past Twelve Months,” U.S. Census Bureau 2008–2012 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, accessed April 25, 2014, http://factfinder2.census.gov.

23

Olivia Golden. “Poverty in America: How We Can Help Families,” Urban Institute, May 8, 2013, accessed May 13, 2014, http://www. urban.org/publications/904584.html.

24

“Table B17001: Poverty Status in the Past 12 Months by Sex by Age,” U.S. Census Bureau 2008–2012 American Community Survey 5-year Estimates, accessed May 13, 2014, http://factfinder2.census. gov.

25

50 • N o r f o l k P l a n t o R e d u c e P o v e r t y

“Navy Releases New Economic Impact Report for Hampton Roads Area,” Department of the Navy, Navy Region Mid-Atlantic Public Affairs Office, accessed May 29, 2014, http://www.cnic.navy. mil/content/dam/cnic/cnrma/pdfs/economic%20impact.pdf, page 3.

According to the Census Bureau, 22,675 Norfolk residents are employed by the armed forces. (“Table B23025: Employment Status for the Population 16 Years and Over,” U.S. Census Bureau 2008-2012 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates) A large percentage of young persons (aged 16 to 24) in the labor force are employed by the military, including 46% of males and 18% of females. (“Table B23001: Sex by Age by Employment Status for the Population 16 Years and Over,” U.S. Census Bureau 2008-2012 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates) Figure 8, which shows poverty rates by census tract, identifies the census tract on the naval base as a high poverty rate census tract. It should be noted that while entry level military salaries are low, military personnel also receive basic allowances for housing (BAH) and other benefits that are not included in income calculations. Another large subgroup in the under 25 population is students enrolled in colleges and universities. Norfolk is home to two universities and a medical school, and the Census Bureau reports that there are 29,395 Norfolk residents enrolled in college or graduate school. (“Table B14001: School Enrollment by Level of School for the Population 3 Years and Over,” U.S. Census Bureau 2008-2012 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates) Figure 8 identifies the census tracts adjacent to Old Dominion University and Norfolk State University as high poverty rate census tracts. Military employment and college enrollment only slightly influence Norfolk’s poverty rates and the citywide level.

Poverty in Virginia: Recommendations from the Commonwealth of Virginia’s Poverty Reduction Task Force, page 9, accessed May 19, 2014, http://www.dss.virginia.gov/geninfo/reports/agency_wide/ poverty_long.pdf.

33

“Table B17018: Poverty Status in the Past 12 Months of Families

by Household Type by Educational Attainment of Householder,” U.S. Census Bureau 2008–2012 American Community Survey

34

5-Year Estimates, accessed April 28, 2014, http://factfinder2.census. gov.

5-Year Estimates, accessed May 9, 2014, http://factfinder2.census. gov.

“Table B17018: Poverty Status in the Past 12 Months of Families

by Household Type by Educational Attainment of Householder,” U.S. Census Bureau 2008–2012 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, accessed April 28, 2014, http://factfinder2.census. gov.

49

35

“Table DP03, Selected Economic Characteristics,” U.S. Census Bureau 2008–2012 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, accessed April 25, 2014, http://factfinder2.census.gov.

36

“Table DP03, Selected Economic Characteristics,” U.S. Census Bureau 2008–2012 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, accessed April 25, 2014, http://factfinder2.census.gov.

37

Annie Rorem and Megan E. Juelfs-Swanson, “New Insights on Childhood Poverty: A Deeper Look into the Results from the Virginia Poverty Measure,” Demographics Research Group, Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service, University of Virginia, page 5, May 2014, accessed May 29, 2014, http://www.coopercenter. org/sites/default/files/publications/ChildhoodPoverty_ WeldonCooperCenter_UVA_May2014_1.pdf.

38

39

Annie Rorem, email message to the author, May 22, 2014.

“Table S1702: Poverty Status in the Past Twelve Months of Families,” U.S. Census Bureau 2008–2012 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, accessed April 29, 2014, http://factfinder2. census.gov.

40

Slide 5, Commission Presentation, “Income Needed to Stay Out of Poverty”, Workforce Development and Norfolk’s Poor, October 2013, Norfolk.

41

“Local Area Unemployment Statistics: Annual Average County Data,” U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, accessed May 19, 2014, http:// www.bls.gov/lau/.

Poverty in Virginia: Recommendations from the Commonwealth of Virginia’s Poverty Reduction Task Force, page 7, accessed May 19, 2014, http://www.dss.virginia.gov/geninfo/reports/agency_wide/ poverty_long.pdf.

Mayor’s Anti-Poverty Commission Report, page 22, accessed May 19, http://www.richmondgov.com/content/ CommissionAntiPoverty/documents/Antipovertycommissionfinal1 _17_2013c--printready.pdf.

50

51 Poverty in Virginia: Recommendations from the Commonwealth of Virginia’s Poverty Reduction Task Force, 2009, page 13, accessed May 19, 2014, http://www.dss.virginia.gov/geninfo/reports/ agency_wide/poverty_long.pdf.

Slide 7, Neighborhood Revitalization Presentation to Commission, American Community Survey, 2006-2010, U.S. Census Bureau, 5-year Estimates, City of Norfolk, December 2013.

52

53 Poverty in Virginia: Recommendations from the Commonwealth of Virginia’s Poverty Reduction Task Force, 2009, page 15, accessed May 19, 2014, http://www.dss.virginia.gov/geninfo/reports/ agency_wide/poverty_long.pdf.

Ron Haskins and Isabel Sawhill, Creating an Opportunity Society, (Harrisonburg, VA: R. R. Donnelley, 2009), 229–30.

54

130 percent of the federal poverty level calculated using the guidelines available at “2014 Poverty Guidelines,” Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, U.S. Department of Health and Human Resources, accessed May 29, 2014, http:// aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/14poverty.cfm.

55

James Heckman, “The Case for Investing in Disadvantaged Young Children,” The Heckman Equation, page 1, accessed May 19, 2014, http://heckmanequation.org/content/resource/ case-investing-disadvantaged-young-children.

42

56

“Table S2301: Employment Status,” U.S. Census Bureau 2008– 2012 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, accessed May 9, 2014, http://factfinder2.census.gov.

57

43

“Table S2301: Employment Status,” U.S. Census Bureau 2008– 2012 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, accessed May 9, 2014, http://factfinder2.census.gov.

44

“Poverty,” Virginia Performs, accessed May 20, 2014, http:// vaperforms.virginia.gov/indicators/economy/poverty.php.

45

“Table S2301: Employment Status,” U.S. Census Bureau 2008– 2012 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, accessed May 9, 2014 http://factfinder2.census.gov.

46

Jeff Connor-Naylor, Sara Okos, and Michael Cassidy, Workforce Development in Virginia, The Commonwealth Institute, page 4, January 2014, accessed May 19, 2014, http://www. thecommonwealthinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/ TCI_workforce2013_final2.pdf.

47

“Table S1701: Poverty Status in the Past Twelve Months,” U.S. Census Bureau 2008–2012 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, accessed April 25, 2014 http://factfinder2.census.gov.

“Table DP02: Selected Social Characteristics in the United States,” U.S. Census Bureau 2008–2012 American Community Survey

48

Ibid., page 52.

Cunha and Heckman, 2007, “The Evolution of Uncertainty in Labor Earnings in the U.S. Economy,” cited in James Heckman, “The Case for Investing in Disadvantaged Young Children,” The Heckman Equation, page 4, accessed May 19, 2014, http://heckmanequation.org/content/resource/ case-investing-disadvantaged-young-children.

58

James Heckman, “The Case for Investing in Disadvantaged Young Children,” The Heckman Equation, page 1, accessed May 19, 2014, http://heckmanequation.org/content/resource/case-investingdisadvantaged-young-children, page 52.

59

“Business Case for Early Childhood Investments,” Ready Nation, February 4, 2013, accessed May 19, 2014, http://www.readynation. org/uploads/20130204_RNBrochureWebVersionWithoutFootnotes. pdf.

60

Rob Grunewald and Arthur J. Rolnick, “An Early Childhood Investment with a High Public Return,” Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, accessed May 13, 2014, http://www.stlouisfed.org/ publications/re/articles/?id=1987.

61

J u n e 2 0 1 4 • 51

Katherine Magnuson, Hiro Yoshikawa, and Jeanne BrooksGunn, “What Research Tells Us About Program Effectiveness in the First Five Years,” presentation at the National Symposium on Early Childhood Science and Policy, June 27, 2008, accessed May 29, 2014, http://developingchild.harvard.edu/index.php/ download_file/-/view/109/, page 22.

62

Early Childhood Development Presentation to Commission, September 2014.

63

Deborah Daro, “Home Visitation: Assessing Progress, Managing Expectations,” Ounce of Prevention Fund and Chapin Hall Center on Children, accessed March 28, 2014, http://www. ounceofprevention.org/research/pdfs/HomeVisitation.pdf.

64

Megan M. Tschudy, Sara L. Toomey, and Tina L. Cheng, “Merging Systems: Integrating Home Visitation and the Family-Centered Medical Home,” Pediatrics 132 (2013): S76.

65

Sarah A. Avellar and Lauren H. Supplee, “Effectiveness of Home Visiting in Improving Child Health and Reducing Child Maltreatment,” Pediatrics 132 (2013): S94.

66

plaNorfolk2030: The General Plan of the City of Norfolk, March 26, 2013, page 8-8, accessed May 13, 2014, http://www.norfolk.gov/ DocumentCenter/View/2483.

67

Pathways to Prosperity: Meeting the Challenge of Preparing Young Americans for the 21st Century, Harvard Graduate School of Education, page 11, accessed May 19, 2014, http://www.gse.harvard. edu/news_events/features/2011/Pathways_to_Prosperity_Feb2011. pdf.

68

130 percent of the federal poverty level calculated using the guidelines available at “2014 Poverty Guidelines,” Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, U.S. Department of Health and Human Resources, accessed May 29, 2014, http:// aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/14poverty.cfm.

69

Students in Norfolk Public Schools spend 6.5 hours in scheduled school time. NPS schedule available at http://www.nps.k12.va.us/ index.php/school-hours, accessed May 13, 2014.

70

Helping Youth Succeed Through Out-of-School Time Programs, American Youth Policy Forum, accessed May 13, 2014, http://www. aypf.org/publications/HelpingYouthOST2006.pdf.

71

Jean Baldwin Grossman and Siobhan M. Cooney. Paving the Way for Success in High School and Beyond: The Importance of Preparing Middle School Students for the Transition to Ninth Grade. Public/ Private Ventures. 2009.

72

thecommonwealthinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/ TCI_workforce2013_final2.pdf.

76

Ibid., page 4.

77

Ibid., page 6.

78

Ibid.

Mayor’s Commission to Reduce Poverty presentation: “The Case for a High Quality, Full-Time Academic Career/Technical High School in Norfolk, Executive Summary, Greater Norfolk Corporation, April 28, 2014.

79

80

Ibid.

“Table B17001: Poverty Status in the Past 12 Months by Sex by Age,” U.S. Census Bureau 2008–2012 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, accessed May 13, 2014, http://factfinder2.census. gov.

81

Jeff Connor-Naylor, Sara Okos, and Michael Cassidy, Workforce Development in Virginia, The Commonwealth Institute, page 5, January 2014, accessed May 19, 2014, http://www. thecommonwealthinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/ TCI_workforce2013_final2.pdf.

82

83

Ibid., page 6.

Hosey Burgess, email describing information that the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) partners are to deliver to cities in LWIA 16, Hampton Roads, April 28, 2014.

84

Poverty in Virginia: Recommendations from the Commonwealth of Virginia’s Poverty Reduction Task Force, page 2, accessed May 19, 2014, http://www.dss.virginia.gov/geninfo/reports/agency_wide/ poverty_long.pdf.

85

“Broad Creek,” Norfolk Redevelopment and Housing Authority, accessed May 20, 2014, http://www.nrha.us/redevelopment/ neighborhoods/broad-creek-0.

86

Next Generation Community Revitalization: A Work in Progress, The Bridgespan Group, page 72, December 2011, accessed May 20, 2014, http://www.bridgespan.org/getattachment/cd9eec539303-48da-bddf-e701ec061d4c/Next-Generation-CommunityRevitalization-A-Work-in.aspx.

87

88

Ibid.

89

Ibid.

Michele Claibourn, “A Review of Effective Practices in Financial Stability,” for the United Way of Greater Richmond and Petersburg, Communitas Consulting, Charlottesville, Virginia, May 2011.

90

Pathways to Prosperity: Meeting the Challenge of Preparing Young Americans for the 21st Century, Harvard Graduate School of Education, page 2, accessed May 19, 2014, http://www.gse.harvard. edu/news_events/features/2011/Pathways_to_Prosperity_Feb2011. pdf.

73

Driving Innovation from the Middle: Middle-Skill Jobs in the American South’s Economy, National Skills Coalition, August 2011, accessed December 28, 2011, http://www.nationalskillscoalition. org/assets/reports-/nsc_sga_middleskillsbrief_2011-08.pdf.

74

Jeff Connor-Naylor, Sara Okos, and Michael Cassidy, Workforce Development in Virginia, The Commonwealth Institute, January 2014, accessed May 19, 2014, http://www.

75

52 • N o r f o l k P l a n t o R e d u c e P o v e r t y

91 plaNorfolk2030: The General Plan of the City of Norfolk, page 3-2, March 26, 2013, accessed May 19, 2014, http://www.norfolk.gov/ DocumentCenter/View/2483.

“Implementation of a Better Block,” Norview Task Force Meeting, January 8th, 2014, accessed May 20, 2014, http://www.norfolk.gov/ ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/520.

92

“Rental Registration and Inspection Program Frequently Asked Questions,” City of Boston, accessed May 20, 2014, https://www. cityofboston.gov/isd/housing/rental_faqs.asp.

93

“Amendment of Councilor Matt O’Malley to Docket #1588,” City of Boston, accessed May 20, 2014, https://www.cityofboston. gov/images_documents/Rental%20Inspection%20OrdinanceSigned%20Copy_tcm3-35341.pdf.

102

“Rental Inspection Program,” City of Williamsburg, accessed May 20, 2014, http://www.williamsburgva.gov/Index.aspx?page=160.

Stanford Social Innovations Review blog, March 14, 2012, accessed May 20, 2014, http://www.ssireview.org/blog/entry/ how_to_organize_alliances_of_multiple_organizations_part_1.

94

95

Janet Viveiros and Rebecca Cohen, “Building Support for Affordable Homeownership and Rental Choices: A Summary of Research Findings on Public Opinion and Messaging on Affordable Housing,” Center for Housing Policy, National Housing Conference, August 2013.

96

25th Anniversary Commission Summary Recommendations, ForKids, Norfolk, Virginia, May 20, 2014.

97

Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice, Hampton Roads Region, Virginia, 2011, Mullin & Lonergan Associates, Inc., page 310, accessed May 20, 2014. The recommendation strategy reads: “Analysis of the City’s Annual Plan and [Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Reports] CAPER documents reveal heavy investment of [Community Development Block Grant] CDBG and [Home Investment Partnerships Program] HOME funds in impacted areas. While improving the quality of life in lower-income minority areas is an important aim, the City must also demonstrate an effort to affirmatively further fair housing by expanding the availability of affordable housing in non-impacted areas. First consideration should be given to the use of CDBG and HOME funds for new family housing development (both sales and rental) on sites outside of impacted areas.” http://www.vbgov.com/ government/departments/housing-neighborhood-preservation/ fair-housing/Documents/Combined%20Final%20Draft%20 11.30.11.pdf.

Christopher Keevil and John Martin, “How to Organize Alliances of Multiple Organizations: Part 1,”

103

Michele Jolin, Paul Schmitz, and Willa Seldon, “Needle-Moving Collaboratives: A Promising Approach to Addressing America’s Biggest Challenges,” The Bridgespan Group, page 8, February 2012, accessed May 20, 2014, http://www.bridgespan.org/getattachment/ efdc40ca-aa41-4fb5-8960-34eb504eaf9a/Needle-MovingCommunity-Collaborative-s-A-Promisin.aspx.

104

105

Ibid.

106

Ibid., page 7.

98

Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice, Hampton Roads Region, Virginia, 2011, Mullin & Lonergan Associates, Inc., page 310, accessed May 20, 2014. The recommendation strategy reads: “Analysis of the City’s Annual Plan and [Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Reports] CAPER documents reveal heavy investment of [Community Development Block Grant] CDBG and [Home Investment Partnerships Program] HOME funds in impacted areas. While improving the quality of life in lower-income minority areas is an important aim, the City must also demonstrate an effort to affirmatively further fair housing by expanding the availability of affordable housing in non-impacted areas. First consideration should be given to the use of CDBG and HOME funds for new family housing development (both sales and rental) on sites outside of impacted areas.” http://www.vbgov.com/ government/departments/housing-neighborhood-preservation/ fair-housing/Documents/Combined%20Final%20Draft%20 11.30.11.pdf.

99

Ibid.

In 2014, $15,171 for an individual, $31,005 for a family of four. 130 percent of the federal poverty level calculated using the guidelines available at “2014 Poverty Guidelines,” Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, U.S. Department of Health and Human Resources, accessed May 29, 2014, http:// aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/14poverty.cfm.

107

The Virginia Poverty Measure “takes into account regional differences in the cost of living; updated income thresholds based on contemporary consumption patterns; family resources from in-kind government transfers; taxes and credits; and necessary medical expenses.” Dustin Cable, “The Virginia Poverty Measure: An Alternative Poverty Measure for the Commonwealth,” Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service, University of Virginia, May 2013, accessed May 20, 2014, http://www.coopercenter.org/sites/default/ files/node/13/VirginiaPovertyMeasure_May2013.pdf.

108

Next Generation Community Revitalization: A Work in Progress, The Bridgespan Group, December 2011, accessed May 20, 2014, http://www.bridgespan.org/getattachment/cd9eec53-9303-48dabddf-e701ec061d4c/Next-Generation-Community-RevitalizationA-Work-in.aspx.

100

Michele Jolin, Paul Schmitz, and Willa Seldon, “Needle-Moving Collaboratives: A Promising Approach to Addressing America’s Biggest Challenges,” The Bridgespan Group, February 2012, accessed May 20, 2014, http://www.bridgespan.org/getattachment/ efdc40ca-aa41-4fb5-8960-34eb504eaf9a/Needle-MovingCommunity-Collaborative-s-A-Promisin.aspx.

101

J u n e 2 0 1 4 • 53

A P P E N D I CE S

1 . S h o rt t e r m Ta s k s f o r I m p l e m e n ti n g Str u c t u r e 2. Commission Research Methods 3 . Crit e ri a f o r S e l e c ti n g R e c o m m e n d ati o n s 4. Commission R e c o m m e n d ati o n s a n d Wor k Pl a n

J u n e 2 0 1 4 • A-1

APPENDIx 1 S h o rt t e r m Ta s k s f o r I m p l e m e n ti n g Str u c t u r e

App e n d i x 1 : S h o rt t e r m Ta s k s f o r I m p l e m e n ti n g Str u c t u r e The following tasks can be completed in 2014, such that a steering committee and leadership team can be launched in 2014–2015 to begin implementation of the major recommendations in the report: ❑❑ Confirm community partners for implementation of short-term recommendations (1-3 years) and secure commitments of resources and leadership. ❑❑ Identify co-chairs of forthcoming steering committee to assist with resource development and office start up. ❑❑ Identify and invite leadership team. ❑❑ Confirm estimated projected costs for recommended steps in years 1–3 through interviews with public and private partners and national resources. ❑❑ Identify pre-existing work groups or committees in Norfolk that may advance the Commission’s work in four goal areas. ❑❑ Identify gaps in leadership for implementing components of the Plan and identify new work groups or community partners needed. ❑❑ Raise estimated costs for convening intermediary for a minimum of two years.

❑❑ Identify in-kind or other staffing resources from the City of Norfolk, non-profit sector, and private sector. ❑❑ Develop a work plan for launch of the implementation phase for approval by executive council and leadership team. ❑❑ Establish membership expectations for committees and work groups. ❑❑ Identify and invite members to join committees and work groups. ❑❑ Confirm intermediary’s leadership access to Mayor, City Manager, and Co-Chairs. ❑❑ Develop means for ongoing resident engagement and participation in implementation through training, membership and outreach. ❑❑ Set up tracking, reporting, and governance structure for implementation of report. ❑❑ Create a public reporting mechanism. ❑❑ Set measures for year one. ❑❑ Advance plan goals with community partners.

❑❑ Issue a “request for proposals” for interested host agencies to sponsor plan implementation. ❑❑ Select intermediary and hire lead staff.

J u n e 2 0 1 4 • A-3

APPENDIx 2 ME T HOD

App e n d i x 2 : M e t h o d Commissioners met over nine months to explore and address the impact of poverty on local residents. They were aided by a team of City staff members who collected data, helped to coordinate and plan work group meetings, and refined the recommendations. The process was managed

by Susan Perry of the City Manager’s Office and designed and facilitated by Saphira Baker of Communitas Consulting in Charlottesville, Virginia (www.communitasconsulting.com).

After the first introductory meeting of the Commissioners, members organized the research and planning in four major areas and developed corresponding work groups. The topics for these four areas were selected through a review of national plans to reduce poverty, local data, and the insights of the Commissioners. In particular, Commissioners reviewed plans from the Commonwealth of Virginia and the cities of Richmond, San Francisco, and New York. Similar to these plans, Commissioners chose to target early childhood development, youth and career pathways, and adult workforce development.

Unique to the Norfolk plan is a core focus on neighborhood revitalization, reflecting the extent to which poverty is concentrated in the city and the desire to transform stressed neighborhoods into places where affordable housing and new economic opportunities create inclusive and mixed communities.

Commissioners identified the intended population to be addressed by the plan as families earning up to 130 percent of the federal poverty rate.71 This category includes those families whose children are eligible for free and reduced lunch. Current

federal poverty guidelines are widely used to establish eligibility for federal and local programs, and the numbers of individuals at these levels is readily attainable on an annual basis through the U.S. Census. Yet there is growing national dissatisfaction with the inadequacy of the federal poverty guidelines to capture individuals’ real needs, resources, and conditions. As an alternative, Commissioners considered use of the Virginia Poverty Measure, which accounts for regional differences and takes into account income transfers and assets.72 However, while this measure includes Norfolk in its calculations for the West Hampton Roads region, it does not calculate locality-level estimates, necessitating use of the more traditional measure for future tracking of the plan.

Once in workgroups, Commissioners followed a results-oriented process, which began with identifying the population they intended to reach and the change desired for that group (i.e., for the early childhood group, the intended population is children, ages 0-5, at 130 percent of the federal poverty level and the outcome is: children will arrive at school emotionally, physically, and academically ready to learn). Members of each work group collected national and local data and information to better understand conditions for the intended population and effective practices that had been proven to work. Workgroups then presented their preliminary findings to their peers at a monthly Commission meeting. These presentations were followed by deliberation and refinement of the recommendations by Commissioners in smaller groups.

Commissioners screened each recommended goal and strategy, using criteria to identify the research,

J u n e 2 0 1 4 • A-5

political will, potential funding and extent of community partners available to advance each strategy (See Appendix 3 for criteria). Several of the strategies were omitted because they were identified as needing more study to show the concrete link with reducing poverty, while others were strengthened given the projected level of community support and need.

At two points during the planning process, Commissioners shared their initial findings with residents for input. First, the City of Norfolk sponsored three town hall meetings in November 2013, where 130 residents provided input and suggested additions and revisions. The Commissioners took this input, as well as the results of the screening exercise, and revised the strategies to reflect many of the voices and the issues expressed in the community meetings.

Second, in March of 2014, Commissioners invited approximately 80 residents again to prioritize the strategies and provide a final review on the progress of the Commissioners’ work. To further strengthen and inform recommendations between November 2013 and February 2014, supplementary information was presented at Commission meetings on state workforce development policies, human service collaboration, data on single parent households, and previously incarcerated residents.

In a final planning session in April 2014, Commissioners confirmed their vision, core values, and anticipated outcomes for the final plan, setting targets for several of the main strategies to reduce poverty.

A-6 • N o r f o l k P l a n t o R e d u c e P o v e r t y

APPENDIx 3 Crit e ri a f o r S e l e c ti n g R e c o m m e n d ati o n s

A P P END I X 3 : Crit e ri a f o r S e l e c ti n g R e c o m m e n d ati o n s

Demonstrated Results/Rigorous Research Must be based on programs/initiatives with demonstrated outcomes. ❑❑ Consider: Is it based on proven practices that have demonstrated documented change for residents and communities? Do you know it works?

Impact and Depth Must prevent poverty over the long-term, have a high impact on individuals involved, and have measureable results. ❑❑ Consider: Will it fundamentally improve conditions for the future, preventing long-term poverty? Is the consequence of addressing, or not addressing, great? Will it have measurable results?

Financially Sustainable Must demonstrate low-cost and no cost options and factor in long-term financial sustainability. ❑❑ Consider: Are there ways to keep this going with multiple funding sources—public, private, individuals? Is it attractive to a range of funders? Efficient? ❑❑ Consider: Are costs reasonable, and/or does this need to be broken down into manageable parts? What are ways to begin to estimate costs?

A-8 • N o r f o l k P l a n t o R e d u c e P o v e r t y

Documented Need or Gap Must address a documented need collectively that no other local organization can do on its own. ❑❑ Consider: Does it reflect a documented need in the community that no one agency can do alone?

High Value to Residents Must incorporate and reflect local input. ❑❑ Consider: Does it reflect Town Hall meeting input? Will it be supported by and used by residents?

Political Will Must have the local leadership and capacity to make this happen. ❑❑ Consider: Is there the leadership and capacity in Norfolk to make this happen?

Supporting Community Partners Must have other entities identified to help support this financially and institutionally. ❑❑ Consider: Will other entities help support this financially and institutionally? Who are some of the key candidates? ❑❑ Consider: Does the Commission have the capacity and influence to be successful? Will this step facilitate others?

APPENDIx 4 Commission R e c o m m e n d ati o n s a n d Wor k Pl a n

A P P ENDI X 4 : C o m m i s s i o n R e c o m m e n d at i o n s a n d W o r k P l a n

E a r ly C h i l d h o o d E d u c at i o n G o a l On e

Prepare young children for academic success and healthy development through effective early childhood programs.

Desired Outcome

Children will arrive at elementary school emotionally, physically, socially, and academically ready to learn.

Intended Population

Strategy

1.1 Increase the number of high quality child care homes and centers, as well as access to them.

1.2 Increase the level of quality of all systems that care for and educate children from birth to five years old.

Children ages 0-5 living in neighborhoods at or below 130 percent of the federal poverty level ($15,171 for an individual or $31,005 for a family of four).

Action Step 1.1.1 Align state and local licensing and zoning regulations to appropriately establish child care in family homes.

1.1.2 Increase the number of homes and centers that have earned Virginia’s Star Quality Initiative (VSQI) designation.

1.2.1 Implement a kindergarten readiness assessment for all children entering the school system.

1.2.2 Create a high-quality universal pre-school program.

Outcomes and Timeline

Mid-term: Zoning regulations and business licenses aligned with state standards

Short-term: Increase in # of centers and homes receiving 5 star ratings; establish a baseline of social and emotional growth (ASQ)

Mid-term: 10-20% Increase in PALS (kindergarten readiness) scores

Lead

City Early Childhood Coordinator City Early Childhood Coordinator

Short-term: City participation in the statewide pilot to define readiness gap; selection and implementation of a full-scale comprehensive kindergarten readiness assessment in Virginia

Long term: 100% of children enrolled. Estimated at $29.5M for all Norfolk 4 year olds (based on 2013-14 NPS enrollment data); Commissioners recommend a phased approach that brings universal preschool to scale over a couple of years with implementation reaching children in high census tracks first ($10.4M).

A-10 • N o r f o l k P l a n t o R e d u c e P o v e r t y

Norfolk Public Schools

Supporting Community Partners Virginia and Norfolk Departments of Social Services, Early Learning Advisory Board, The Planning Council

Elevate Early Education (E3), Richmond, VA;, United Way, The Planning Council, Children’s Harbor, Norfolk Public Schools, Home Providers Network, business and faith community providers

Budget Year One, 07/14 –

Year Two, 07/15 –

Year Three,

06/15

06/16

07/16 – 06/17

$10,000

$10,000

$55,000

$55,000

$10,000: providing incentives to improve program quality $55,000: five centers ($7,500) and five homes ($3,500) each year

Elevate Early Education (E3), Early Learning Board, Norfolk Public Schools

$0, participate in pilot at no cost (pilot includes teacher incentives)

$0, anticipated state funding

$0, anticipated state funding

Elevate Early Education (E3), Early Learning Board, Norfolk Public Schools

Expansion of the four-year old preschool program is $2.0 million and 22 positions (in proposed FY15 budget)

$10.4 million for pre-school slots for 1,044 four year old children in census tracts with 18 - 74% poverty rates, at a cost of $10,000 per child.

$10.4 million for pre-school slots for 1,044 four year old children in census tracts with 18 - 74% poverty rates, at a cost of $10,000 per child.

Strategy

1.3 Connect families in need with early intervention and support services.

1.4 Develop a focused outreach effort in the community and educational settings.

Action Step

1.3.1 Implement a universal screening and referral system for all newborn children and their families citywide.

1.4.1 Develop a public awareness and outreach campaign regarding the importance of the early childhood period and parent education resources to engage teen and young mothers and fathers, their parents, and educators.

Outcomes and Timeline

Short-term: 100% of families with newborns are screened and connected/referred to services as appropriate

Short-term: select baseline # of presentations, participants, and survey of knowledge

Mid-term: Increase in knowledge about child development (survey)

1.4.2 Ensure wide distribution of a “checklist” to assist parents and educators prepare for kindergarten.

1.4.3 Coordinate services and outreach among non-profit organizations, City government, community stakeholders, business and military partners, faith-based organizations, and the educational system for a unified systemic approach.

Short-term: Meeting schedule with 75% attendance; % in # of joint grant applications

Lead

E3, Early Childhood Coordinator

United Way

City Manager’s Office, City Council Champion

Supporting Community Partners

The Planning Council, Early Head Start, hospitals, military, City of Norfolk, home visiting consortium and programs, Norfolk Department of Social Services, Hampton Roads Parenting Education Network, KPI

Elevate Early Education (E3), United Way, The Planning Council, Norfolk Public Schools, Norfolk Department of Social Services, Center for Early Childhood Education at Darden School, Early Childhood Center,

libraries, Public Health, City of Norfolk, Hampton Roads Parenting Education Network, KPI, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Children’s Hospital of the King’s Daughters, OFC of Neighborhoods, business community, higher education institutions

City of Norfolk, Training and Technical Assistance Center at ODU, nonprofit organizations, business and military partners, faithbased organizations, and educational systems

Approximate annual total:

Budget Year One, 07/14 –

Year Two, 07/15 –

Year Three,

06/15

06/16

07/16 – 06/17

$69,500 (includes 2 new positions within 211 to handle intake of additional referrals, $60,000 each, and First Steps program $11.56 per participant; with a 41% (CRMC) acceptance rate (based on 2000 births) @ 820 participants = $9,479.20

$46,000 (based on Greater Richmond’s Smart Beginnings and Kindergarten Registration campaigns)

$468,321 Additional program coordinator needed to respond to service needs ($45,000) plus more intensive services provided by RNs (Chesapeake’s model) at an annual cost of $423,321 for 2,000 babies

$468,321

($91,636 for universal post-delivery screening, $9,479 for hospital education, $322,206 for home visiting services).

$48,000

$50,000

Included in above total.

Included in above total.

Included in above total.

$0, no cash outlay; in-kind contributions.

$0, no cash outlay; in-kind contributions.

$0, no cash outlay; in-kind contributions.

$2.2 million

$11 million

$11 million

J u n e 2 0 1 4 • A-11

Y o u t h Pat h way s G oa l T wo

Prepare youth and young adults to secure family-sustaining employment through effective programs that address both in-school and out-of-school factors.

Desired Outcome

Young people will graduate high school ready for higher education or a career that will assist them in achieving family-sustaining employment.

Intended Population

Strategy

Youth in grades kindergarten through twelve, in families living at or below 130 percent of the federal poverty level ($15,171 for an individual or $31,005 for a family of four).

Action Step

2.1.1 Offer high quality outof-school time enrichment and education programs during the summer and after school for elementary and middle school students.

2.1 Improve academic achievement for low-income elementary, middle, and high school students.

2.1.2 Support and replicate the P.B. Young Elementary School Pilot Model, which provides an extended school year through summer enrichment.

2.1.3 Implement the Open Campus High School Model, which offers flexible scheduling and personal learning plans.

Outcomes and Timeline

Mid-term: Evidence-based OST programs at 6 NPS schools.

Increased achievement rates.

Long-term: Evidence-based OST programs at all NPS schools.

Increased achievement rates.

Short-term: PB Young achieving benchmark, 2 per year, 6 in 3 years, 7 in pilot.

Long-term: Grade 9 advancement rate from benchmark level (to be set).

Mid-term: Increased graduation rate, re-acquire dropouts; improve rate by 30%.

A-12 • N o r f o l k P l a n t o R e d u c e P o v e r t y

Lead

Supporting Community Partners

Norfolk Public Schools, Magic Johnson, United Way

Year One,

Year Two,

Year Three,

07/14 – 06/15

07/15 – 06/16

07/16 – 06/17

$60,000 for PB Young After-school costs

$60,000 for PB Young After-school costs

$60,000 for PB Young After-school costs

Norfolk Public Schools

United Way

Budget

Norfolk Public Schools, Parks and Recreation, Community Services Boards, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Old Dominion University, Norfolk Redevelopment and Housing Authority, faith-based groups, PPT, MJ Foundation

$1.2 - $1.8 million annually ($150,000 $200,000 per Middle School based on Fairfax and Norfolk’s 21st C. grants) for six schools

$1.2- $1.8 Million for 6 middle schools

$1. 2 - $1.8 Million for 6 middle schools

$200,000 with additional $250,000 in-kind per elementary school with 350 participants

$400,000 for two additional schools.

$400,000 for two additional schools.

$1.3 million and 6 positions (1 guidance counselor, 2 instructional assistants, 1 office manager and 2 security officers)

$1.3 million and 6 positions (1 guidance counselor, 2 instructional assistants, 1 office manager and 2 security officers)

$1.3 million and 6 positions (1 guidance counselor, 2 instructional assistants, 1 office manager and 2 security officers)

Strategy

Action Step

2.2.1 Partner with Hampton Roads employers to document career pathways and develop educational content for Norfolk Public Schools.

2.2. Improve the quality and exposure to career education and skills training for Norfolk’s youth.

2.2.2 Develop a model and provide training in career pathways for teachers and guidance counselors.

2.2.3 Engage Norfolk Public Schools middle and high school students in career option awareness, inclusive of internships and corporate work experiences.

2.2.4 Approve and implement the proposed career and technical high school through a public and private, collective impact, funding collaborative.

Outcomes and Timeline Short-term: # of completed pathways and educational content models.

Long-term: % of industry certifications among Hampton Road’s Top 10 in 3 years (Ship/ Maritime, Healthcare, Tourism)

Short-term: Increased knowledge of career pathways, all counselors complete training and competency verifications in use of career pathways Mid-term: Increased # of privatesector student engagements, increase in field trips by x% in 3 years, increased student engagement B& I

Mid-term: % # of successfully completed internships, increase in number of NPS student internships to 1000 in 5 years

Long-term: increased graduation rates, industry certifications, 100% pass rates for SOL, 95% of students transition to higher education or the workforce

Lead

Supporting Community Partners

Norfolk Public Schools, business and community partners

Norfolk Public Schools, business and community partners Norfolk Public Schools, business and community partners

VSRA, hospitals, manufacturers

Norfolk Public Schools Approximate annual total:

Budget Year One,

Year Two,

Year Three,

07/14 – 06/15

07/15 – 06/16

07/16 – 06/17

$0, no cash outlay: in-kind support from Hampton Roads employers

$0, no cash outlay: in-kind support from Hampton Roads employers

$0, no cash outlay: in-kind support from Hampton Roads employers

$40,000 - $60,000

$40,000

$40,000

$70,000

$72,000

$74,000

$4,270,000 – schematic design and design development; construction documents, bidding and construction administration; additional services

$4,270,000 – continuation of Year I design and development

$29,517,283 – construction, testing and special inspection, contingencies, A/E, commissioning

$7.4 - $8.1 million

$7.4 - $8.0 million

$32.6 - $33.2 million

J u n e 2 0 1 4 • A-13

Wor k f orc e Dev e lop m e n t G oa l T h r e e

Help adults prepare for the workplace by expanding access to career development programs and employment support.

Desired Outcome

Adults will gain employment at or above a living wage.

Intended Population

Underemployed or unemployed adults, ages 18 and above, with a priority on residents age 18–44 without a GED or high school diploma.

Budget

Strategy

Action Step

3.1.1 Collect resources and/or develop a guide for community employment and educational opportunities

3.1 Increase information about and access to employment, education, training opportunities, and work-related resources.

3.1.2 Launch a public relations campaign to inform citizens and employers of available workforce resources.

3.1.3. Provide resources to the libraries and other centrally-located organizations to operate as centers of access points for workforce preparation.

Outcomes and Timeline

Short-term: Increased use of internet and print guide by public, % of use (for agencies)

Short-term: Increased client contacts/calls/web use

Short-term: Increased referrals to VEC/Opportunity, DARS, etc.

A-14 • N o r f o l k P l a n t o R e d u c e P o v e r t y

Lead

City Communications Department/ collaborative team, 211

City IT Staff

Employment and Training Committee

Supporting Community Partners Opportunity, Inc.; Virginia Employment Commission, Step Up, Department of Social Services, Department for Aging and Rehabilitative Services, Norfolk Redevelopment and Housing Authority The Up Center, The Planning Council

Libraries, Channel 48, public service announcements, radio stations (e.g., WHRO), faith-based organizations

Year One,

Year Two,

Year Three,

07/14 – 06/15

07/15 – 06/16

07/16 – 06/17

$35,000 (printing and design costs)

$10,000 update and printing

$10,000 update and printing

$100,000

$100,000

$100,000 and use of current city resources – TV programming, publications and website, libraries and community centers, neighborhood meetings and newsletters, economic development marketing materials $0, internal review of libraries to use as workforce centers – Opp. Inc. provides training at no expense – Libraries require computers – review of current number and identify existing staff or determine whether additional staffing is required.

$300,000-$350,000 (six libraries, six positions (one at each site) @ $45,000, computers and information resources@ $80,000)

$300,000$350,000

Budget Strategy

3.2 Provide access, support, information, and services to adult populations living in poverty.

3.3 Promote workforce development resources as part of the City of Norfolk’s business retention efforts.

Action Step

Outcomes and Timeline

Lead

3.2.1 Gather information to determine the local populations most in need and their most significant barriers to employment and then make recommendations to address obstacles to education and employment.

Short-term: Percentage participation of target populations

City Human Services

3.2.3 Consider the findings of the assessment of the Norfolk Reentry Council in finalizing recommendations for previously incarcerated adults.

Short-term: Finalized report

3.2.2 Conduct a service asset and gap analysis of existing employment and training resources in the city to identify areas of focus.

3.3.1 As part of the City of Norfolk’s economic development efforts, continue to assess Norfolk businesses’ workforce needs and provide regular feedback to Opportunity, Inc. 3.3.2 Encourage major public and private businesses to identify, utilize, and provide support to small women-owned and minority-owned contractors and businesses.

Short-term: Share findings

Department of Development and Opportunity, Inc.

Short-term: # of seminars/ events to educate the business community

Department of Development

Supporting Community

Year One,

Year Two,

Year Three,

07/14 – 06/15

07/15 – 06/16

07/16 – 06/17

$25,000

$0

$0

$75,000

$0

$0

N/A

N/A

N/A

$0

$0

$0

$7,500

$7,500

$7,500

$242,500

$417,500 $467,500

$417,500 $467,500

Partners Human services staff, ODU students, Workforce Development Committee members, Norfolk Redevelopment and Housing Authority, Department of Social Services kiosks

Virginia Employment Commission, Greater Norfolk Corporation, Consortium of Businesses, Retail Alliance, Chamber of Commerce, Hampton Roads Planning District Opportunity, Inc., Virginia Employment Commission, National Association of Women Business Owners, professional organizations

Approximate annual total:

J u n e 2 0 1 4 • A-15

N e i g h b o r h o o d R e v i ta l i z at i o n G oa l F ou r

With residents driving the process, create safe and thriving communities by increasing access to jobs, neighborhood amenities, and quality affordable homes.

Desired Outcome

Stabilized, mixed-income, mixed use neighborhoods.

Intended Population

Strategy

Residents of stressed neighborhoods with high poverty, high rental rates, and high levels of transition.

Action Step

4.1.1 Build capacity of residents by expanding Neighbors Building Neighborhoods program.

4.1 Stabilize stressed neighborhoods through community revitalization and economic development.

4.1.2 Strengthen community corridors connected to distressed neighborhoods.

4.1.3 Expand Norfolk’s rental inspection program to raise the quality of rental units and increase the accountability of absentee landlords, informed by promising practices.

4.1.4 Form an interdisciplinary group of citizens and organizations responsible for selecting and adopting proven high-impact community revitalization strategies.

Outcomes and Timeline Short-term:15 % Increase of residents involved in civic leagues and volunteer opportunities, change in language describing neighborhood

Short-term: % Increase of residents enrolled in leadership development.

Mid-term: Plan approved in concert with residents and Council

Short-term: State legislation enacted

Short-term: Work Group Formed, Community revitalization model adopted by Council.

Long-term: Decreased crime, increased stability, active multi-sector coalition

A-16 • N o r f o l k P l a n t o R e d u c e P o v e r t y

Lead

City of Norfolk

City of Norfolk

Supporting Community Partners

Norfolk Redevelopment and Housing Authority, Norfolk Police Department, civic leagues, churches, businesses

Norfolk Economic Development Authority, business owners, enterprise zones, Planning Committee for Resiliency Project in Norfolk

City of Norfolk

Homeowners, quality developers, legislative patrons

City of Norfolk

Norfolk Redevelopment and Housing Authority, Norfolk Public Schools, faith-based organizations, civic leagues, businesses, non-profit organizations

Budget

Year One,

Year Two,

Year Three,

07/14 – 06/15

07/15 – 06/16

07/16 – 06/17

$30,000 for training Request for Proposal (train the trainer model) to assist community groups with achieving goals

$45,000 to hire new neighborhood development specialist dedicated to low-income neighborhoods using CDBG funds.

$45,000 NDS for low-income neighborhoods using CDBG funds.

$150,000

$150,000

$150,000. Breakdown: $60,000 would be to do two additional Better Block programs a year, $40,000 to implement improvements realized through the programs (i.e., support pop-ups, parklets, infrastructure improvements), and $50,000 to fund the NICE block grants to help with neighborhood improvements. Money could be reprogrammed from commercial corridor funds New positions cannot be added in this year as budget is already passed; could try and implement with existing staff on a smaller scale but would be difficult

$0

$150,000 to hire three additional code inspectors to run the program - one per each area identified in the ordinance - Denby Park, Olde Huntersville and East Ocean View. http:// www.norfolk.gov/index. aspx?NID=1113 Costs for Integration Initiative in five cities averages $14 – 21 million. Capital is a blend of catalyst fund (1520%), grants (15%), and commercial loans (40-75%).

$150,000

$14 – 21 million. Capital is a blend of catalyst fund (15-20%), grants (15%), and commercial loans (40-75%).

Strategy

4.2 Develop mixed-income housing and mixed-use communities in distressed neighborhoods.

4.3 Create policies to facilitate the deconcentration of poverty in Norfolk’s public housing communities.

Action Step

4.2.1 Develop a citywide and regional housing plan, including implementation strategies, to ensure an adequate supply of quality and affordable housing.

4.2.2 Establish a regional Housing Trust Fund to finance quality affordable housing in the region.

4.2.3 Create and implement a public education campaign on the benefits, best practices, and positive outcomes of affordable and mixed-income housing.

4.3.1 Establish an affirmative policy to deconcentrate poverty by creating opportunities for residents to transition from government-owned, dense public housing to privately-owned housing in mixed-income neighborhoods.

4.3.2 Establish a policy to deconcentrate clusters of poverty through regulatory methods, including zoning ordinances.

Outcomes and Timeline

Lead

Mid-term: Regional housing plan adopted by localities

Norfolk Redevelopment and Housing Authority, Mayor, Council

Mid-term: Regional Councils agree on funding source and establishment, ordinance adopted regionally, oversight board created.

Long-term: % increase in # of mixed-income units occupied

Short-term: % increase in presentations, participants, and new knowledge Short-term: Policy created, approved

by Planning Commission, adopted by City Council.

Long-term: % increase in # of mixed income units occupied

Short-term: Policy created, approved

by Planning Commission, adopted

by City Council, City regulations and policies support deconcentration of poverty

ForKids 25th Anniversary Commission City of Norfolk

Supporting Community

Budget Year One,

Year Two,

Year Three,

07/14 – 06/15

07/15 – 06/16

07/16 – 06/17

$150,000 - $350,000

$0

$0

ForKids 25th anniversary commission, Hampton Roads Planning District Commission, HRCF

$4 million ($2.5 - $5 million) annually for Norfolk’s share of the regional trust fund.

$4 million ($2.5 - $5 million) annually

$4 million ($2.5 - $5 million) annually

Norfolk Redevelopment and Housing Authority, Hampton Roads Planning District Commission, faith-based organizations, Housing Opportunities Made Equal

$50,000 for half-time staff and materials-content.

Commission.

$50,000

$50,000

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

$4.4 million - $4.6 million

$18.4 million - $25.4 million

$18.4 million $25.4 million

Partners

Hampton Roads Planning District Commission, Norfolk Redevelopment and Housing Authority, City of Norfolk

City of Norfolk

Norfolk Redevelopment and Housing Authority, Housing and Urban Development, VAHDA, multifamily and mixed use developers, Housing Trust Fund Board

City of Norfolk

Norfolk Redevelopment and Housing Authority, Housing Trust Fund Board, civic leagues

Approximate annual total:

J u n e 2 0 1 4 • A-17

C r o s s - c u t t i ng S t r at e g i e s C r o s s - C u t t i ng S t r at e g y

Engage Norfolk citizens in reducing poverty individually and collectively.

Intended Population

Adults and children living at or below 130% poverty in the City of Norfolk.

Strategy

5.1 Increase awareness and use of available resources and ways to improve the health of Norfolk children, families, and neighborhoods.

5.2 Coordinate the implementation of the plan to reduce poverty.

Action Step

1.1.1 Develop and implement a public awareness campaign to promote knowledge and use of effective programs.

Outcomes and Timeline

Mid-term: % increase in requests for information, use of 211, and enrollment in programs.

1.1.2 Improve consumer access to available resources.

Short-term: Campaign and outreach materials created and distributed widely.

1.2.1 Establish a coordinating structure to facilitate, advocate for, and identify ongoing support for plan recommendations.

Short-term: Implementation office up and running, work groups established and underway, tracking system for results created.

1.2.2 Collect and share data on progress to reduce poverty in the City of Norfolk.

Mid-term: Progress on plan reported bi-annually. System in place that measures broad community indicators and specifc program outcomes for components of plan.

A-18 • N o r f o l k P l a n t o R e d u c e P o v e r t y

Lead

TBD

TBD

TBD

TBD

Supporting Community Partners City of Norfolk, The Planning Council, ForKids, Inc., Sentara, EVMS, health care providers, nonprofit organizations, business and military partners, faith-based organizations, and educational systems.

City of Norfolk, The Planning Council, ForKids, Inc., nonprofit organizations, business and military partners, faith-based organizations, and educational systems.

Commission members, City of Norfolk, future public/ private entity.

City of Norfolk, local universities, future public/private entity.

Approximate annual total:

Budget

Year One,

Year Two,

Year Three,

07/14 – 06/15

07/15 – 06/16

07/16 – 06/17

$45,000

$45,000

$45,000

$0

$0

$0

$150,000

$180,000

$200,000

$35,000

$60,000

$60,000

$230,000

$285,000

$305,000

App r o x i m at e t o ta l c o s t s

Early Childhood Education Youth Pathways Workforce Development Neighborhood Revitalization

Year One: 07/14 – 06/15

Year Two: 07/15 – 06/16

Year Three: 07/16 – 06/17

Total

$2.2 million

$11 million

$11 million

$24.2 million

$242,500

$417,500 - $467,500

$417,500 - $467,500

$1.1 - $1.2 million

$305,000

$820,000

$6.1 - $6.8 million

Cross-cutting strategies

$4.4 million - $4.6 million

Total

$13.1 - $15.3 million

$230,000

$7.4 - $8.0 million

$18.4 million - $25.4 million $285,000

$37.5 - $46.6 million

$31.3 - $31.9 million

$44.8 - $46.7 million

$18.4 million - $25.4 million

$41.2 - $55.4 million

$61.4 - $63.6 million

$112.1 - $128.3 million

J u n e 2 0 1 4 • A-19

PREPARED BY COMMUNITAS CONSULTING COMMUNITASCONSULTING.COM

City of Norfolk 810 Union Street, Norfolk VA 23510

Contact: Susan L. Perry, Ph.D. (757) 664-4761